Matter of Disciplinary Proceedings Against Barrock
Wisconsin Supreme Court
1DissentPatience Drake Roggensack, J.
¶ 61. (idissenting in part). The court's per curiam decision approves the discipline of Attorney Mitchell J. Barrock for violations of various supreme court rules. Per cu-riam op., ¶ 3.1 agree that Attorney Barrock should be disciplined for rule violations. I write in partial dissent because I conclude that Attorney Barrock should not be disciplined for the alleged violation of SCR 20:1.15(d)(3) because this court has concluded that it is permissible to fail to hold settlement proceeds received from a personal injury claim in an attorney trust account when the attorney knows there is a claim…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Yorgan v. DurkinWisconsin Supreme Court · 2006
- Weigel v. GrimmettCourt of Appeals of Wisconsin · 1992
- Matter of RawsonNew Mexico Supreme Court · 1992
- Matter of Richland Bldg. Systems, Inc.United States Bankruptcy Court, W.D. Wisconsin · 1984
- In Re AllenIndiana Supreme Court · 2004