Attorney Siderits was a recently promoted law-firm shareholder
who allegedly cheated on his firm’s bonus policy by submitting several inflated
bills, which he reduced before the clients were invoiced. Each of the two
years, Siderits obtained a bonus of about $25,000 that he allegedly would not
have obtained had he reported his billings accurately. Despite returning the
bonuses, Siderits was terminated by the firm.
Equating dishonesty with clients
and business associates wasn’t always the rule in Wisconsin, where the courts
announced the new policy in In re Casey (1993) 174 Wis.2d 341,
in which the attorney nevertheless received the traditional lesser suspension lasting
60 days. The Wisconsin Supreme Court has been clear that disbarment is
warranted when an attorney steals from his clients. Taking money belonging
to a client for oneself "warrants the most severe discipline—license
revocation." (In re Wright (1994)
180 Wis.2d 492, 493.) But even in its zeal to defend the interests of
major partners, the court imposed discipline much less severe than if Siderits
had stolen funds from a client trust account.
Although the Wisconsin bar hasn’t succeeded in its drive to equate offenses against clients with those against business partners, we’re left with
the question of why it’s pushing that envelope. Who benefits? The answer, the
major partners in the large law firms, who can use free bar discipline in
place of expensive civil suits. The state bars impose the heavy financial costs
of discipline on the respondent. The threat of discipline secured the return of
the bonus money without cost to the firm. The firm, which could have sought
punitive damages under Wisconsin law, otherwise might have had to sue Siderits on
its own dime. (Wisconsin Stat. § 895.043, subd. (3); Berner Cheese
Corporation v. Krug (2008) 312 Wis.2d 251 [plaintiff may receive punitive
damages for defendant's breach of fiduciary duty if defendant acted maliciously
toward plaintiff or with intentional disregard of plaintiff's rights].)
