## Facts

- John C. Curran, a Wisconsin lawyer and law-firm partner, engaged over several years in undisclosed self-payments and diversion of funds connected to firm finances and client matters.
- In connection with an office-building project for the firm, Curran managed construction finances and paid himself a $50,000 construction-management fee without informing his partners.
- Curran also paid himself a $350 monthly management fee for about 18 months, again without partner disclosure.
- In a client matter involving a construction company and its president, Curran arranged for the client to pay him directly for legal services and deposited about $81,300 into his personal account rather than the firm’s account.
- Without partner authorization, Curran issued credits on that client’s bills totaling roughly $109,000, reducing amounts that would otherwise have been payable to the firm.
- The same client conveyed a condominium to Curran by quitclaim deed in exchange for a $13,000 credit on legal fees that otherwise belonged to the firm.
- In a separate matter involving litigation connected to the daughter of a corporate client, Curran bypassed firm billing procedures, used manual billing statements that obscured the nature of the work, and deposited about $10,000 in fees into his personal account instead of the firm’s account.
- The disciplinary authority filed a complaint; the parties stipulated to the relevant facts and rule violations.
- A referee recommended a six-month suspension; the disciplinary authority sought at least two years, and Curran sought a 30-day suspension.
- Curran had no prior disciplinary history and had resolved monetary disputes with former partners after leaving the firm.

## Issues

1. What sanction is appropriate for a lawyer who, over years, secretly diverts firm-related payments, issues unauthorized billing credits, and pays himself undisclosed fees tied to firm business and client matters?
2. Do attorney disciplinary rules apply to dishonest financial conduct involving law partners and firm-client funds, even when the lawyer characterizes some conduct as “business” or internal partnership matters?

## Decision

- The Wisconsin Supreme Court ordered a two-year suspension, increasing discipline from the referee’s recommended six-month suspension.
- The court rejected Curran’s request for a 30-day suspension and rejected his attempt to reframe the misconduct as acceptable compensation practices or a non-disciplinary business dispute.
- The court found the misconduct showed a pattern of deceit and repeated breach of fiduciary duty for personal financial gain.
- The court held that professional conduct rules reached Curran’s dealings with partners and client-related funds, including conduct involving dishonesty, fraud, deceit, or misrepresentation.
- The court concluded that lack of prior discipline did not outweigh the seriousness, duration, and intentional nature of the misconduct.

## Legal Principles

- Lawyer discipline may be imposed for conduct involving dishonesty, fraud, deceit, or misrepresentation in financial dealings connected to law practice, including intra-firm fee handling and client-payment practices.
- A lawyer’s fiduciary duties to law partners and the firm are subject to professional regulation when the conduct entails concealment or misappropriation tied to client matters or firm finances.
- Labeling misconduct as a “business” or partnership dispute does not remove it from disciplinary authority where the conduct is dishonest and results in personal gain.
- In setting sanctions, aggravating factors include intentional concealment, use of personal accounts to divert funds, repeated acts over time, and substantial financial impact; mitigation such as an otherwise clean record may be outweighed.

## Conclusion

The court suspended Curran for two years because his undisclosed self-payments, diversion of client-related funds, and unauthorized billing credits constituted an intentional, multi-year pattern of dishonest conduct within the reach of attorney disciplinary rules, warranting substantial discipline despite no prior misconduct record.


Matter of Disciplinary Proceedings Against Curran, 180 Wis. 2d 540, 509 N.W.2d 429 (Wis. 1994)