Board of Attorneys Professional Responsibility v. Kathryn P. Karlsson
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
2002 WI 25 SUPREME COURT CASE NO.: OF WISCONSIN 00-2043-D COMPLETE TITLE: In the Matter of Disciplinary Proceedings Against Kathryn P. Karlsson, Attorney at Law. Board of Attorneys Professional Responsibility, Complainant, v. Kathryn P. Karlsson, Respondent. MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION 2001 WI 126 Reported at: 248 Wis. 2d 681, 635 N.W.2d 771 (S.Ct. 2001-Published) OPINION FILED: SUBMITTED ON BRIEFS: ORAL ARGUMENT: SOURCE OF APPEAL: COURT: COUNTY: JUDGE: JUSTICES: CONCURRED: DISSENTED: NOT PARTICIPATING: ATTORNEYS: March 15, 2002 2002 WI 25 NOTICE This opinion is subject to further editing and modification. The final version will appear in the bound volume of the official reports. No. 00-2043-D STATE OF WISCONSIN IN SUPREME COURT : In the Matter of Disciplinary Proceedings Against Kathryn P. Karlsson, Attorney at Law. FILED Board of Attorneys Professional Responsibility, MAR 15, 2002 Complainant, Cornelia G. Clark Clerk of Supreme Court v. Kathryn P. Karlsson, Respondent. MOTION for reconsideration. Reconsideration denied. ¶1 a PER CURIAM. This is motion for reconsideration filed by the Office of Lawyer Regulation (OLR), f/k/a the Board of Attorneys Professional Responsibility, seeking clarification of the opinion issued in this matter on November 29, 2001. The motion opinion. has identified The motion two is inadvertent denied but the omissions from the original opinion is modified by adding ¶¶37a and 54a and by substituting new ¶38 as follows: No. 00-2043-D ¶37a Based on these findings, the referee concluded that Attorney Karlsson's failure to comply with discovery requests and name witnesses which resulted in an award of costs against her client and her failure to enter the judgment in favor of her client, was a failure to act with reasonable diligence and promptness in representing her client, P.M., in violation of SCR 20:1.3. ¶38 The referee also concluded that Attorney Karlsson's failure to respond to numerous telephone calls made by or on behalf of P.M. inquiring as to the status or outcome of his personal injury action, constituted a failure to keep her client reasonably informed about the status of the matter and her failure to respond to a client's reasonable request for information in violation in SCR 20:1.4(a). ¶54a IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that for a period of two years after reinstatement Attorney Karlsson must arrange for another attorney, approved by the OLR director, to monitor Attorney Karlsson's practice in quarterly meetings with her at which the status of Attorney Karlsson's client files will be reviewed and the monitoring attorney will then submit quarterly reports to the OLR on the status of all pending matters in Attorney Karlsson's practice. 2 No. 1 00-2043-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.
