Legal Opinion

Office of Lawyer Regulation v. Matthew H. Marx

Wisconsin Supreme Court

Decided July 22, 2016No. 2016AP000101-DPublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

¶ 1.

2Per curiam

We review a stipulation, as revised, filed pursuant to Supreme Court Rule (SCR) 22.12 by the Office of Lawyer Regulation (OLR) and Attorney Matthew H. Marx. Attorney Marx stipulates to the misconduct alleged by the OLR, stipulates, further, that he should be ordered to pay restitution to two clients and that his license to practice law in Wisconsin should be suspended for nine months.

¶ 2. We adopt the stipulated facts and conclusions of law. We agree that Attorney Marx's professional misconduct warrants the suspension of his Wisconsin law license for a period of nine months. We further…

3Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Disciplinary Proceedings Against ScanlanWisconsin Supreme Court · 2006
  2. Office of Lawyer Regulation v. WoodWisconsin Supreme Court · 2013
  3. Office of Lawyer Regulation v. John R. MaynardWisconsin Supreme Court · 2014

4Cited by3 opinions

  1. Office of Lawyer Regulation v. Matthew H. MarxWisconsin Supreme Court · 2016
  2. Office of Lawyer Regulation v. Matthew H. MarxWisconsin Supreme Court · 2016
  3. Office of Lawyer Regulation v. Schiltz (In Re Schiltz)Wisconsin Supreme Court · 2018

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API