Office of Lawyer Regulation v. Scott E. Selmer
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
2005 WI 91 SUPREME COURT CASE NO.: OF WISCONSIN 1998AP886-D COMPLETE TITLE: In the Matter of Disciplinary Proceedings Against Scott E. Selmer, Attorney at Law: Office of Lawyer Regulation f/k/a Board of Attorneys Professional Responsibility, Complainant-Respondent, v. Scott E. Selmer, Respondent-Appellant. DISCIPLINARY PROCEEDINGS AGAINST SELMER OPINION FILED: SUBMITTED ON BRIEFS: ORAL ARGUMENT: SOURCE OF APPEAL: COURT: COUNTY: JUDGE: JUSTICES: CONCURRED: DISSENTED: NOT PARTICIPATING: ATTORNEYS: June 24, 2005 2005 WI 91 NOTICE This opinion is subject to further editing and modification. The final version will appear in the bound volume of the official reports. No. 1998AP886-D STATE OF WISCONSIN : IN SUPREME COURT In the Matter of Disciplinary Proceedings Against Scott E. Selmer, Attorney at Law: Office of Lawyer Regulation f/k/a Board of Attorneys Professional Responsibility, FILED Complainant-Respondent, JUN 24, 2005 v. Cornelia G. Clark Clerk of Supreme Court Scott E. Selmer, Respondent-Appellant. Attorney reinstatement proceeding. ¶1 referee, PER CURIAM. Russell We Hanson, review that Reinstatement granted. the Scott recommendation E. practice law in Wisconsin be reinstated. Regulation (OLR) and the Board of Bar Selmer's of the license to The Office of Lawyer Examiners (BBE) have fact and joined in that recommendation. ¶2 We adopt the referee's findings of conclusions of law and agree that Scott E. Selmer's license to practice law should be reinstated, subject to his compliance with current continuing legal education (CLE) requirements. No. 1998AP886-D Attorney Selmer shall also be required to pay the costs of the reinstatement proceeding. ¶3 Selmer, a Minnesota attorney, was admitted to practice law in Wisconsin in 1978. Board of Attorneys In 1990, the OLR's predecessor, the Professional Responsibility (Board), privately reprimanded Selmer for failing to provide competent representation by filing papers that reflected a lack of knowledge of Wisconsin appellate procedure and tribunals, and for filing documents while administratively suspended for failure to comply with CLE requirements. ¶4 In 1995, Attorney Selmer received a public reprimand as reciprocal discipline for a reprimand imposed upon him by the Minnesota Supreme Court. In re Disciplinary Selmer, 529 N.W.2d 694 (Minn. 1995). failing to promptly provide Action Against Misconduct consisted of his client in a personal injury matter a full accounting of funds he received on her behalf, charging and suing that client to collect an unreasonable fee, abusing the maintain discovery proper trust process account in that action, and records books failing and to falsely certifying that he had done so, and commingling personal and client funds in his trust account. This court conditioned Attorney Selmer's continued practice of law on his furnishing the Board copies of his trust account records for a period of two years. See In re Disciplinary Proceedings Against Selmer, 195 Wis. 2d 687, 538 N.W.2d 252 (1995). ¶5 Attorney Selmer's current license suspension was also imposed as reciprocal discipline for misconduct that occurred in 2 No. Minnesota. In re Disciplinary Action Against Selmer, 568 N.W.2d 702 (Minn. 1997). engaged 1998AP886-D in a The Minnesota court concluded that Selmer had pattern of frivolous and harassing conduct by filing counterclaims alleging racial discrimination in actions brought against him by personal creditors and by filing claims in state and federal courts alleging racial discrimination. id. The Minnesota courts concluded that Selmer's See claims of racial discrimination lacked merit, and concluded further that Selmer knowingly offered false and misleading evidence in response to discovery requests, failed to supplement incomplete and misleading responses to discovery requests, failed to comply or make proper reasonably discovery diligent requests, efforts made to with statements false comply of legally fact in attempts to advance his own interests, and engaged in dishonest conduct in those actions. Id. twelve months for this He was suspended for a period of misconduct. Id. By order dated November 30, 2001, the Minnesota court conditionally reinstated Selmer's license to practice law in Minnesota. In re Disciplinary Action Against Selmer, 636 N.W.2d 308 (Minn. 2001). ¶6 On May 13, 2003, Selmer filed this petition pursuant to SCR 22.29, seeking reinstatement of his license to practice law in Wisconsin. 14, 2004, reinstatement the Various procedural delays ensued. OLR primarily formally on the opposed basis of On April the petition these delays, for which included the provision of necessary documentation to the OLR. ¶7 On May 4, 2004, Referee Hanson conducted a hearing, which was continued and concluded on October 25, 2004. 3 See SCR No. 1998AP886-D 22.30. Referee Hanson filed his report and recommendation on November 26, 2004. again delayed to Neither party appealed. permit Selmer to The matter was complete all necessary continuing educational requirements. ¶8 The referee concluded that since his reinstatement in Minnesota, Attorney Selmer's conduct has been "exemplary." The attorney who supervised him during the reinstatement process in Minnesota testified on his behalf at the reinstatement hearing, opining that he "will act in conformity Professional Conduct]" and stating: [with the Rules of "I think . . . he will be extremely careful about all of his dealings and that he will comport himself in an ethical way." ¶9 persuasive the testimony from various character witnesses Selmer produced. The referee The referee noted that found Selmer credible had and accounted for his time in Minnesota and that there was no evidence he has practiced law in Wisconsin since his suspension. He is in full compliance with the Minnesota CLE requirements and is now in compliance with the requirements imposed in Wisconsin. ¶10 Ultimately, the referee concluded: The recommendations of others who entered their support for the respondent were impressive and persuasive and the respondent himself clearly highly desires the return of his Wisconsin license. I can find no failure on his part significant enough to recommend against his reinstatement and I, therefore, recommend it. ¶11 As noted, recommendation. the OLR did not appeal the report and It has filed a statement of costs incurred in 4 No. 1998AP886-D connection with the reinstatement proceeding, in the amount of $9,053.34. ¶12 Following submission of this matter to the court further delay ensued as Selmer sought to provide the BBE with necessary documentation requirements. regarding compliance with CLE We have now been advised that this documentation has been provided and that the BBE recommends his reinstatement. ¶13 After review of the record we conclude that Selmer has established by clear, satisfactory, and convincing evidence that he has satisfied Accordingly, we adopt conclusions of law recommendation that all Mr. Wisconsin be reinstated. the the and criteria referee's we Selmer's for reinstatement. findings agree license with to of the fact and referee's practice law in We conclude further that he should be required to pay the costs of this reinstatement proceeding. ¶14 IT IS ORDERED that the petition for reinstatement of the license of Scott E. Selmer to practice law in Wisconsin is granted, effective the date of this order, subject to compliance with current continuing legal education requirements. ¶15 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that within six months of the date of this order Scott E. Selmer pay to the OLR the costs of this proceeding. If the costs are not paid within the time specified, and absent a showing to this court of his inability to pay the costs within that time, the license of Scott E. Selmer to practice law in Wisconsin shall be suspended until further order of the court. 5 No. 1 1998AP886-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.
