Office of Lawyer Regulation v. Godfrey Y. Muwonge
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
2017 WI 12 SUPREME COURT CASE NO.: COMPLETE TITLE: OF WISCONSIN 2007AP776-D In the Matter of Medical Incapacity Proceedings Against Godfrey Y. Muwonge, Attorney at Law: Office of Lawyer Regulation, Complainant-Respondent, v. Godfrey Y. Muwonge, Respondent-Appellant. DISCIPLINARY PROCEEDINGS AGAINST MUWONGE OPINION FILED: SUBMITTED ON BRIEFS: ORAL ARGUMENT: SOURCE OF APPEAL: COURT: COUNTY: JUDGE: JUSTICES: CONCURRED: DISSENTED: NOT PARTICIPATING: ATTORNEYS: February 17, 2017 2017 WI 12 NOTICE This opinion is subject to further editing and modification. The final version will appear in the bound volume of the official reports. No. 2007AP776-D STATE OF WISCONSIN : IN SUPREME COURT In the Matter of Medical Incapacity Proceedings Against Godfrey Y. Muwonge, Attorney at Law: FILED Office of Lawyer Regulation, Complainant-Respondent, FEB 17, 2017 v. Diane M. Fremgen Clerk of Supreme Court Godfrey Y. Muwonge, Respondent-Appellant. ATTORNEY disciplinary proceeding. ¶1 PER CURIAM. Conditions imposed. We review the report and recommendation of Referee Dennis J. Flynn approving a stipulation filed by the Office of Muwonge. Lawyer Regulation (OLR) and Attorney Godfrey Y. Attorney Muwonge stipulated to the facts underlying 43 counts of misconduct as alleged in the OLR's amended complaint, and Attorney conditions misconduct. Muwonge and and restitution The referee the as OLR jointly discipline determined there recommend for was certain the admitted an adequate factual basis to establish the alleged misconduct and concluded No. that the parties' joint recommendation for 2007AP776-D discipline was appropriate. ¶2 Upon careful review of this matter, we uphold the referee's findings of fact and conclusions of law, as derived from the parties' conditions and stipulation, restitution are Attorney Muwonge's misconduct. proceeding on Attorney and agree that sufficient imposition discipline of for We impose the full costs of this Muwonge, which are $2,053.07, as of November 21, 2016. ¶3 This is an unusual disciplinary proceeding. It commenced in 2007 but was held in abeyance because Attorney Muwonge was deemed to have a medical incapacity. That medical incapacity has been removed so the disciplinary proceeding can proceed. ¶4 Attorney Wisconsin in Muwonge 1997, and was admitted practiced to practice immigration law law in in the Milwaukee area. ¶5 In April 2007, the OLR filed a disciplinary complaint against Attorney Muwonge alleging 43 counts of misconduct and seeking revocation of Attorney Muwonge's law license. ¶6 On September 29, 2008, the OLR and Attorney Muwonge stipulated that Attorney Muwonge had a medical incapacity and that, because of the medical incapacity, Attorney Muwonge could not successfully defend against the allegations of professional misconduct. recommending, On October consistent 22, with 2008, this a court's referee rules, agreed, that we suspend Attorney Muwonge's law license indefinitely, pursuant to 2 No. SCR 22.16(4), and that we proceeding in abeyance. hold the pending 2007AP776-D disciplinary On December 23, 2008, we issued an order adopting the referee's findings and conclusions; the 2007 disciplinary proceeding was held in abeyance. Incapacity Proceedings Against Muwonge, In re Medical No. 2007AP776, unpublished order (S. Ct. Dec. 23, 2008). ¶7 sought In the following years, Attorney Muwonge successfully and obtained treatment for his mental health and substance abuse issues. ¶8 his In June 2015, Attorney Muwonge sought reinstatement of license incapacity proceeding to had practice been ensued. law, asserting removed. The referee An that his extensive agreed, and medical evidentiary ultimately this court concluded that Attorney Muwonge had demonstrated by clear, satisfactory and convincing evidence that he is no longer medically incapacitated and that he is fit to practice law. In re Medical Incapacity Proceedings Against Muwonge, 2016 WI 55, 369 Wis. 2d 658, 881 N.W.2d 25. On July 1, 2016, we reinstated Attorney Muwonge's law license subject to a number of stringent conditions designed to monitor his continued fitness to practice law and to ensure protection of the public. ¶9 also Upon reinstating Attorney issued an order pertaining Id. Muwonge's to the law license, underlying we 2007 disciplinary proceeding that had been held in abeyance during his period of medical incapacity. See SCR 22.16(4)(d) ("[u]pon reinstatement, the court shall direct the referee to proceed 3 No. with the misconduct action.") 2007AP776-D We directed the referee and the parties to proceed with the 2007 disciplinary proceeding. ¶10 has The parties executed a stipulation that the referee accepted. Our task now is to review the referee's recommendation regarding the 2007 disciplinary proceeding. ¶11 The misconduct proceeding is serious. alleged in the 2007 disciplinary The amended complaint alleged 43 counts of professional misconduct involving 15 clients, primarily in immigration cases. It reflects a pattern of failure to pursue client matters, failure to respond to client inquiries, failure to communicate with clients, failure to keep clients informed, failure to refund retainers or costs that were not expended, and failure to return client files. For example, Attorney Muwonge was retained to help A&W Iron Metal, Inc. (A&W) obtain permanent resident status for certain employees. Attorney Muwonge failed to meet with the clients to address their questions, failed to return filed documents, permanent status." and "[n]one of the workers received Individual clients were also harmed when Attorney Muwonge failed to appear at hearings or to complete work he had undertaken for them. ¶12 All told, the OLR alleged and Attorney Muwonge has stipulated that he violated the following supreme court rules: 4 No. 2007AP776-D Former SCR 20:1.4(a)1 as alleged in counts one (L.C. and J.C.), four (A.L.), seven (A.B.), ten (N.R.), sixteen (P.K. and K.P.), nineteen (A&W), twenty-three (A.K.), twenty-five (L.P.), twentyeight (W.W.), thirty (M.O. and K.O.), thirty-two (G.B.), thirty-five (P.M.), thirty-nine (M.B.), and forty-one (A.D. and S.D.). SCR 20:1.4(b)2 as alleged in count thirty-three (G.B.). Former SCR 20:1.16(d)3 as alleged in counts two (L.C. and J.C.), five (A.L.), eight (A.B.), twelve (N.R.), fourteen (S.M.), seventeen (P.K. and K.P.), twenty (A&W), twenty-one (A&W), twenty-six (L.P.), thirty-four (G.B.), thirty-six (P.M.), forty-two (A.D. and S.D.), and fortythree (A.D. and S.D.). 1 Former SCR 20:1.4(a) applies to misconduct committed prior to July 1, 2007. It provided in pertinent part that a "lawyer shall keep a client reasonably informed about the status of a matter and promptly comply with reasonable requests for information." 2 SCR 20:1.4(b) provides: "a lawyer shall explain a matter to the extent reasonably necessary to permit the client to make informed decisions regarding the representation." 3 Former SCR 20:1.16(d) applies to misconduct committed prior to July 1, 2007. It provided in pertinent part that: . . . upon termination of representation, a lawyer shall take steps to the extent reasonably practicable to protect a client's interests, such as giving reasonable notice to the client, allowing time for employment of other counsel, surrendering papers and property to which the client is entitled and refunding any advance payment of fee that has not been earned. The lawyer may retain papers relating to the client to the extent permitted by other law. 5 No. 2007AP776-D SCR 20.1.34 as alleged in counts three (A.L. and H.N.), six (A.B.), nine (A.B.), fifteen (P.K.), eighteen (A&W), twenty-two (A.K.), twenty-four (L.P.), twenty-seven (W.W.), twenty-nine (M.O.), thirty-one (G.B.), thirty-eight (M.B.), and forty (A.D. and S.D.). Former SCR 20:1.15(a), in effect until June 30, 2004,5 as alleged in count eleven. SCR 22.03(6)6 and SCR 20:8.4(f)7 as alleged in count thirteen. SCR 20:8.4(c)8 as alleged in count thirty-seven (P.M.). ¶13 he fully In the stipulation, Attorney Muwonge represented that understands the misconduct allegations; fully 4 SCR 20:1.3 provides: "a lawyer shall act with reasonable diligence and promptness in representing a client." 5 Former SCR 20:1.15(a) applies to misconduct committed prior to July 1, 2004. It will not be restated in its entirety but generally provided that: "a lawyer shall hold in trust, separate from the lawyer's own property, that property of clients and third persons that is in the lawyer's possession in connection with a representation or when acting in a fiduciary capacity." 6 SCR 22.03(6) provides: "In the course of the investigation, the respondent's wilful failure to provide relevant information, to answer questions fully, or to furnish documents and the respondent's misrepresentation in a disclosure are misconduct, regardless of the merits of the matters asserted in the grievance." 7 SCR 20:8.4(f) provides: "It is professional misconduct for a lawyer to violate a statute, supreme court rule, supreme court order or supreme court decision regulating the conduct of lawyers." 8 SCR 20:8.4(c) provides: "It is professional misconduct for a lawyer to engage in conduct involving dishonesty, fraud, deceit or misrepresentation." 6 No. 2007AP776-D understands his right to contest the matter; fully understands the ramifications of his entry into the stipulation; acknowledges that he has had the representation and advice of counsel; and states that his entry into the stipulation is made knowingly and voluntarily. ¶14 amended The referee complaint misconduct. found that adequately the facts support alleged the allegations the in of The referee determined that Attorney Muwonge's plea was made freely, knowingly and voluntarily, and that Attorney Muwonge fully understands the misconduct allegations as well as his right to contest those charges. Further, the referee determined that Attorney Muwonge understands the ramifications of his decision to stipulate to the alleged misconduct. The referee concluded that the record in this case establishes by clear, satisfactory and convincing evidence that Attorney Muwonge engaged in the misconduct as alleged in each of the 43 counts set forth in the amended complaint. The referee thus approved Attorney Muwonge's no contest plea to the allegations of misconduct in the amended complaint. ¶15 agreed With respect to the appropriate sanction, the parties that the imposition sufficient of additional restitution is discipline misconduct. The referee agreed as well. for conditions Attorney and Muwonge's He noted that Attorney Muwonge was suspended from practice for over eight years, from April 2008 incapacity. to July 2016, primarily due to his medical The referee acknowledged that Attorney Muwonge has since taken "significant and meaningful steps" to remove his 7 No. medical incapacity. The referee noted that 2007AP776-D this court has already imposed a "significant number of monitoring strategies and restrictions intended to provide safeguards to the public who may utilize his services." court accept the parties' The referee recommended this joint recommendation as to the sanctions, impose additional conditions, and order payment of restitution to three clients. ¶16 No appeal has been filed, so we review the referee's report pursuant to SCR 22.17(2). We will adopt a referee's findings of fact unless they are clearly erroneous. of law are reviewed de novo. Against Eisenberg, 2004 Conclusions See In re Disciplinary Proceedings WI 14, ¶5, 269 Wis. 2d 43, 675 N.W.2d 747. The court may impose whatever sanction it sees fit, regardless of the referee's recommendation. See In re Disciplinary Proceedings Against Widule, 2003 WI 34, ¶44, 261 Wis. 2d 45, 660 N.W.2d 686. ¶17 We conclusion adopt that the Attorney referee's Muwonge findings violated of the fact and supreme his court rules as alleged in the OLR's amended complaint, and as admitted in the stipulation. ¶18 Typically, misconduct as serious as that alleged here would warrant a lengthy license suspension or revocation, which bars an attorney from seeking reinstatement for at least five years.9 Here, Attorney Muwonge's law license was suspended for 9 SCR 22.29(2) provides: "A petition for reinstatement of a license that is revoked may be filed at any time commencing five years after the effective date of revocation." 8 No. eight years, from 2008 until 2016, when he 2007AP776-D successfully demonstrated that his medical incapacity had been removed. ¶19 again, To suspend or revoke Attorney Muwonge's law license for misconduct that occurred prior to the lengthy suspension for medical incapacity, would not serve the interests of justice and is not necessary to protect the public. the specific imposition facts of of this additional case, we conditions are satisfied and Under that the restitution, as stipulated by the parties and recommended by the referee, is sufficient discipline for the misconduct described in the 2007 disciplinary proceeding. ¶20 We accept the conditions recommended by the referee. We agree that Attorney Muwonge shall continue to comply with all conditions previously imposed by this court in our order of July 1, 2016, conditionally reinstating Attorney Muwonge's law license.10 10 The conditions imposed on Attorney Muwonge court's July 1, 2016 order are summarized here: in this (1) WisLAP Monitoring. Continued participation in the WisLAP monitoring program for a period of two years following the date of this order; (2) Law Practice Supervision and Status Reports. Supervision of his law practice for a period of two years following the date of this order; (3) Treatment and Status Reports. Continued treatment as recommended by Attorney Muwonge's treatment providers to address mental health issues, with at least one mental health treatment provider sending the OLR a written status report in January and July 2017, and in January and July 2018; (continued) 9 No. ¶21 2007AP776-D The parties have stipulated and the referee recommends that Attorney Muwonge should be ordered to pay restitution to three former clients, A.B., A.K., and A&W. Apparently the parties were unable to reach agreement on the precise amount of restitution that Attorney Muwonge should pay to each client. This is evidenced by language in the parties' stipulation stating that the $2,500 and $800 in restitution due to A.B. and A.K., respectively, may be "reduced by any amount Muwonge can establish to the satisfaction of OLR that represents the value of services he actually performed" for each of these clients. The parties also stipulate that restitution is due to A&W employees in an amount "believed to be $11,800 to $16,800" that should be services "determined [Attorney by an Muwonge] accounting actually of the value performed of for the [the clients], that Muwonge must provide to the satisfaction of OLR." ¶22 to This court is not a fact finder and we are disinclined accept indeterminate restitution recommendations. We are also disinclined to accept a recommendation that does not impose a time frame for the parties to resolve the amount (4) Financial obligations. Attorney Muwonge shall, if he has not already done so and subject to his ability to pay, make arrangements with the Wisconsin Lawyers' Fund for Client Protection (Fund) for repayment of any sums due to the Fund and shall also make arrangements with the OLR for repayment of outstanding costs. 10 of No. restitution owed to a client injured by 2007AP776-D an attorney's misconduct. ¶23 $2,500 We to direct A.B. stipulation, this Attorney Consistent amount Muwonge with may the be to make terms reduced by restitution of the any of parties' amount that Attorney Muwonge can establish, to the satisfaction of the OLR, represents the value of legal services he actually performed for A.B. However, any appropriate reduction in A.B.'s restitution award must be determined promptly. ¶24 The parties are thus directed to advise this court, in writing, within 90 days of the date of this order, whether a reduction in the restitution award to A.B. is appropriate. If the parties are unable to reach an agreement, they shall so advise the court and the court may submit the matter to a referee for a determination of appropriate restitution and for a recommendation as to which party should bear the costs of the referee's supplemental review to determine the amount of restitution that should be paid to A.B. ¶25 to A.K. We direct Attorney Muwonge to make restitution of $800 Consistent with the terms of the parties' stipulation, this amount may be reduced by any amount Attorney Muwonge can establish, to the satisfaction of the OLR, represents the value of legal services appropriate actually reduction in performed A.K.'s for A.K. restitution Again, award any must be court, in determined promptly. ¶26 The parties are directed to advise this writing, within 90 days of the date of this order, whether a 11 No. reduction in appropriate. the amount of restitution owed 2007AP776-D to A.K is If the parties are unable to reach an agreement, they shall so advise the court and the court may submit the matter to a referee for a determination of the appropriate restitution and for a recommendation as to which party should bear the costs of the referee's supplemental review to determine the amount of restitution that should be paid to A.K. ¶27 to A&W. amount Attorney Muwonge is also ordered to make restitution The parties' stipulation indicates that the appropriate of restitution $16,800. to A&W is likely between $11,800 and The parties are directed to advise this court, in writing, of the appropriate amount of restitution due to A&W within 90 days of the date of this order. If the parties are unable to reach an agreement, the parties shall so advise the court and the court may submit the matter to a referee for a determination of appropriate restitution due to A&W and for a recommendation as to which party should bear the costs of the referee's supplemental review to determine the amount of restitution that should be paid to A&W. ¶28 The referee also recommends we require Attorney Muwonge to successfully attend continuing legal education and legal ethics (CLE) courses as deemed appropriate by the OLR. agree that specific Muwonge's the CLE OLR courses law may direct during practice, the Attorney period provided it Muwonge to monitors those CLE We attend Attorney course recommendations will not require overnight travel and do not exceed the requirements Attorney Muwonge must fulfill to satisfy 12 No. his continuing legal education requirements. 2007AP776-D See SCR Chapter 31 (Continuing Legal Education). ¶29 Finally, we also deem it appropriate, as is our usual custom, to impose the full costs of this disciplinary proceeding on Attorney Muwonge. ¶30 IT IS ORDERED that compliance with all of the terms of this order and our July 1, 2016 order are conditions of Godfrey Y. Muwonge's license to practice law in Wisconsin. ¶31 pay IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Godfrey Y. Muwonge shall restitution of $2,500 to A.B., less any appropriate reduction to be determined as set forth in this order. ¶32 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED the parties are directed to advise this court, in writing, of the appropriate amount of restitution due to A.B., within 90 days of the date of this order. ¶33 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Godfrey Y. Muwonge shall pay restitution of $800 to A.K., less any appropriate reduction to be determined as set forth in this order. ¶34 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED the parties are directed to advise this court, in writing, of the appropriate amount of restitution due to A.K., within 90 days of the date of this order. ¶35 ordered IT to IS make FURTHER ORDERED restitution to that A&W Godfrey Iron Y. Metal, Muwonge Inc., is in an directed to amount to be determined as set forth in this order. ¶36 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED the parties are advise this court, in writing, of the appropriate amount of 13 No. 2007AP776-D restitution due to A&W Iron Metal, Inc., within 90 days of the date of this order. ¶37 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the restitution specified above is to be completed prior to paying costs. ¶38 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Godfrey Y. Muwonge shall attend continuing legal education and legal ethics courses as directed by the Office of Lawyer Regulation during its monitoring period, subject to the limitations set forth in this order. ¶39 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that within 60 days of the date of this order, Godfrey Y. Muwonge shall pay to the Office of Lawyer Regulation the costs of $2,053.07. 14 this proceeding, which are No. 1 2007AP776-D
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
