Office of Lawyer Regulation v. Rodney T. Carroll
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
2007 WI 8 SUPREME COURT CASE NO.: OF WISCONSIN 2004AP2055-D COMPLETE TITLE: In the Matter of Disciplinary Proceedings Against Rodney T. Carroll, Attorney at Law: Office of Lawyer Regulation, Complainant, v. Rodney T. Carroll, Respondent. DISCIPLINARY PROCEEDINGS AGAINST CARROLL OPINION FILED: SUBMITTED ON BRIEFS: ORAL ARGUMENT: SOURCE OF APPEAL: COURT: COUNTY: JUDGE: JUSTICES: CONCURRED: DISSENTED: NOT PARTICIPATING: ATTORNEYS: January 23, 2007 2007 WI 8 NOTICE This opinion is subject to further editing and modification. The final version will appear in the bound volume of the official reports. No. 2004AP2055-D STATE OF WISCONSIN : IN SUPREME COURT In the Matter of Disciplinary Proceedings Against Rodney T. Carroll, Attorney at Law: FILED Office of Lawyer Regulation, JAN 23, 2007 Complainant, A. John Voelker Acting Clerk of Supreme Court v. Rodney T. Carroll, Respondent. ATTORNEY disciplinary proceeding. Attorney's license revoked. ¶1 PER CURIAM. This is a reciprocal discipline matter. Attorney Rodney T. Carroll became licensed to practice law in Iowa in 1999 and was admitted to practice law in Wisconsin in 2000. On August 2, 2004, the Office of Lawyer Regulation (OLR) filed a disciplinary complaint against Attorney Carroll asking this court to impose reciprocal discipline identical to that imposed on Attorney Carroll by the Supreme Court of Iowa. That court temporarily suspended Attorney Carroll's Iowa law license No. on April 30, 2004. from Attorney 2004AP2055-D The temporary suspension in Iowa resulted Carroll's conviction for second-degree felony theft and his fraudulent conversion of funds belonging to the Dubuque (Iowa) Arts Council. ¶2 On October 19, 2004, pursuant to SCR 22.20, this court summarily suspended Attorney Carroll's license to practice law in Wisconsin due to his criminal conviction. Attorney Carroll's Wisconsin license has remained suspended through the date of this order. ¶3 On September 22, 2006, the Supreme Court of Iowa issued an order revoking Attorney Carroll's license to practice law in Iowa. The Supreme Court of Iowa concluded that by converting funds belonging to the Dubuque Arts Council, Attorney Carroll had violated DR 1-102(A)(3),(4) & (6) of the Iowa Code of Professional Responsibility for lawyers. The court also stated that Attorney Carroll's felony conviction violated DR 1102(A)(5), which prohibits administration of justice. multiple nature of conduct prejudicial to the It concluded that the serious and Attorney Carroll's conversion of funds required the revocation of his license to practice law in Iowa. ¶4 On October 12, 2006, this court issued an order to show cause directing Attorney Carroll to show cause in writing by November 1, 2006, why the imposition of reciprocal discipline identical to that imposed by the Supreme Court of Iowa would be unwarranted and why the costs of this disciplinary proceeding should not be imposed against him. respond to the order to show cause. 2 Attorney Carroll failed to No. ¶5 On indicating $1121.98. November that the Attorney 16, costs 2006, of Carroll the the has OLR filed proceeding not objected 2004AP2055-D a report to date were to the OLR's statement of costs. ¶6 the SCR 22.22(3) provides that this court "shall impose identical discipline [t]he procedure in the or other license suspension jurisdiction was unless so . . . lacking in notice or opportunity to be heard as to constitute a deprivation of due process" violation; "[t]here was such an infirmity of proof establishing the misconduct . . . that [this court] could not accept as final" the other jurisdiction's misconduct finding; or "[t]he misconduct justifies substantially different discipline" here. Neither the OLR nor Attorney Carroll contends, nor does this court find, that any of these three exceptions exist in this case. Accordingly, the imposition of reciprocal discipline identical to that imposed by the Supreme Court of Iowa is required. ¶7 IT IS ORDERED that the license of Rodney T. Carroll to practice law in Wisconsin is revoked, effective the date of this order. ¶8 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that within 60 days of the date of this order Attorney Carroll shall pay to the Office of Lawyer Regulation the costs of this proceeding. ¶9 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Attorney Carroll shall comply, if he has not already done so, with the requirements of SCR 22.26 pertaining to the duties of a person whose license to practice law in Wisconsin has been revoked. 3 No. 1 2004AP2055-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.
