Office of Lawyer Regulation v. Mark E. Sostarich
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
2006 WI 24 SUPREME COURT CASE NO.: OF WISCONSIN 2004AP1911-D COMPLETE TITLE: In the Matter of Disciplinary Proceedings Against Mark E. Sostarich, Attorney at Law: Office of Lawyer Regulation, Complainant, v. Mark E. Sostarich, Respondent. REINSTATEMENT OF SOSTARICH OPINION FILED: SUBMITTED ON BRIEFS: ORAL ARGUMENT: March 17, 2006 SOURCE OF APPEAL: COURT: COUNTY: JUDGE: JUSTICES: CONCURRED: DISSENTED: NOT PARTICIPATING: ATTORNEYS: PROSSER and BUTLER, JR., J.J., did not participate. 2006 WI 24 NOTICE This opinion is subject to further editing and modification. The final version will appear in the bound volume of the official reports. No. 2004AP1911-D STATE OF WISCONSIN : IN SUPREME COURT In the Matter of Disciplinary Proceedings Against Mark E. Sostarich, Attorney at Law: FILED Office of Lawyer Regulation, Complainant, MAR 17, 2006 v. Cornelia G. Clark Clerk of Supreme Court Mark E. Sostarich, Respondent. ATTORNEY disciplinary proceeding. ¶1 PER recommending CURIAM. that We Attorney Reinstatement granted. review Mark a E. referee's Sostarich's practice law in Wisconsin be reinstated. report license to The Office of Lawyer Regulation (OLR) and the Board of Bar Examiners (BBE) have both joined in that favorable recommendation. ¶2 findings Attorney After careful consideration, we adopt the of law conclude fact and Sostarich's conclusions license to of and practice law referee's should that be No. reinstated. 2004AP1911-D We direct Attorney Sostarich to pay the costs of the reinstatement proceeding. ¶3 Wisconsin Attorney in Sostarich 1978. On was May 18, admitted to 2004, practice this court law in summarily suspended his license to practice law upon learning that he had pled guilty in federal court to one count of conspiracy to commit offenses involving federal program funds under Title 18, U.S.C. §§ 371, 666, 1341 and 1346 in connection with a public corruption scandal involving former Senator Gary George. States v. Sostarich, No. 03 CR 260 (E.D. Wis. 2005). United See SCR 22.20(1).1 ¶4 An attorney disciplinary investigation was conducted and on June 29, 2005, this court suspended Attorney Sostarich's license to practice law for a period of 18 months. In so doing we rejected as insufficient the referee's recommendation for a 12-month committed honesty, suspension. a criminal We ruled act that trustworthiness or that Attorney reflected fitness as Sostarich adversely a lawyer on in had his other respects, in violation of SCR 20:8.4(b) when he engaged in the 1 SCR 22.20(1) provides: criminal convictions. Summary license suspension (1) Summary suspension. Upon receiving satisfactory proof that an attorney has been found guilty or convicted of a serious crime, the supreme court may summarily suspend the attorney's license to practice law pending final disposition of a disciplinary proceeding, whether the finding of guilt or the conviction resulted from a plea of guilty or no contest or from a verdict after trial and regardless of the pendency of an appeal. 2 on No. conduct resulting in the criminal aforementioned 2004AP1911-D conviction. The suspension was imposed retroactive to the date his summary suspension took effect. Attorney Sostarich was also directed to pay disciplinary the costs Disciplinary of that Proceedings Against proceeding. Sostarich, 2005 See WI In re 97, 282 of his with our Wis. 2d 712, 698 N.W.2d 711. ¶5 Attorney license to Sostarich practice law in now seeks reinstatement Wisconsin. Consistent standard practice, the matter was submitted to a referee for consideration. ¶6 On December 21, 2005, Referee Kim Peterson conducted a formal hearing on the reinstatement petition. filed a report and recommendation on Referee Peterson January 18, 2006, recommending this court grant the petition for reinstatement. The OLR and the BBE have both joined in that favorable recommendation. ¶7 SCR 22.31(1) provides the reinstatement of a law license. standard to be met for The petitioner must meet the burden of demonstrating "by clear, satisfactory, and convincing evidence" that the lawyer has the moral character to practice law, that the lawyer's resumption of the practice of law will not be detrimental subversive of the to public the administration interest, and that of the justice or lawyer has complied with SCR 22.26 and the terms of the suspension. ¶8 In addition, SCR 22.29(4) sets forth related requirements that a petition for reinstatement must show. 3 All No. of these additional requirements are effectively 2004AP1911-D incorporated into SCR 22.31(1). ¶9 Here, the referee met all had of the concluded criteria for that Attorney Sostarich reinstatement, including compliance with repayment obligations, and has met his burden of demonstrating that his should be reinstated. license to practice law in Wisconsin The referee specifically noted that "the prior misconduct, for which Mr. Sostarich was sanctioned, is really an aberration in his life as an attorney, and not part of a pattern of improper behavior." ¶10 fully We in note the further underlying that Attorney federal Sostarich criminal cooperated proceeding, self- reported his conviction to the OLR, and is complying fully with the criminal proceeding. penalties imposed upon him in the criminal On March 11, 2005, Attorney Sostarich was sentenced in federal court to three years probation, conditioned on 150 days of home confinement, confinement including with the electronic usual conditions monitoring. He of home was also ordered to pay restitution to the Police Athletic League in the amount of $42,649 and to perform 75 hours of community service. We note that during the sentencing proceeding in the federal court, the sentencing judge considered Attorney Sostarich's significant health concerns, commented that there was no real financial gain to Attorney Sostarich, and commented very favorably on Attorney Sostarich's otherwise stellar record of community and public service. 4 No. ¶11 After careful review of the record we 2004AP1911-D agree that Attorney Sostarich has established by clear, satisfactory, and convincing necessary evidence for that he has reinstatement. We satisfied note all further the criteria that he was suspended for a period of 18 months and his license has now been under suspension nearly two years. ¶12 and Accordingly, we adopt the referee's findings of fact conclusions recommendation to of law reinstate and practice law in Wisconsin. we Attorney accept the Sostarich's referee's license to We direct Attorney Sostarich to pay the costs of this reinstatement proceeding, which total $2022.35 as of March 2, 2006. ¶13 IT IS ORDERED that the petition for reinstatement of the license of Mark E. Sostarich to practice law in Wisconsin is granted, effective the date of this order. ¶14 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that within six months of the date of this order Mark E. Sostarich pay to the Office of Lawyer Regulation 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 Mark E. Sostarich to practice law in Wisconsin shall be suspended until further order of the court. ¶15 DAVID T. PROSSER and LOUIS B. BUTLER, JR., J.J. did not participate. 5 No. 1 2004AP1911-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.
