Legal Opinion

Office of Lawyer Regulation v. Clemment (In Re Clemment)

Wisconsin Supreme Court

Decided June 15, 2018No. 2017AP001933-DPublishedCited by 1 opinion

1Per curiam

¶ 1 We review the report of Referee John Nicholas Schweitzer recommending that Attorney Sarah Clemment be declared in default, concluding that Attorney Clemment engaged in professional misconduct, and recommending that she be publicly reprimanded. Attorney Clemment failed to present a defense despite being given the opportunity to do so, and she did not oppose the Office of Lawyer Regulation's (OLR) motion for default. Accordingly, we declare her to be in default. We also conclude that a public reprimand is an appropriate sanction for her misconduct. We further agree with the referee that…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. In the Matter of Disciplinary Proceedings Against WiduleWisconsin Supreme Court · 2003
  2. In the Matter of Disciplinary Proceedings Against EisenbergWisconsin Supreme Court · 2004
  3. In the Matter of Disciplinary Proceedings Against NussbergerWisconsin Supreme Court · 2006
  4. In Re Disciplinary Proceedings Against KelsayWisconsin Supreme Court · 1990
  5. Office of Lawyer Regulation v. John R. DadeWisconsin Supreme Court · 2017

3Cited by1 opinion

  1. Office of Lawyer Regulation v. Thomas R. NapieralaWisconsin Supreme Court · 2024

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

Powered by the Exa API