Office of Lawyer Regulation v. Moats (In re Disciplinary Proceedings Against Judy R. Moats)

Citation406 Wis.2d 31,2023 WI 15,986 N.W.2d 304
Docket Number2022AP1420-D
Decision Date24 February 2023
Parties In the MATTER OF DISCIPLINARY PROCEEDINGS AGAINST Judy R. MOATS, Attorney at Law: Office of Lawyer Regulation, Complainant, v. Judy R. Moats, Respondent.
CourtWisconsin Supreme Court

ANNETTE KINGSLAND ZIEGLER, C.J. (concurring).

¶10 I concur in the court's order revoking Attorney Moats’ license to practice law in Wisconsin. I write separately to point out that in Wisconsin the "revocation" of an attorney's law license is not truly revocation because the attorney may petition for reinstatement after a period of five years. See SCR 22.29(2). I believe that when it comes to lawyer discipline, courts should say what they mean and mean what they say. We should not be creating false perceptions to both the public and to the lawyer seeking to practice law again. See In re Disciplinary Proceedings Against Moodie, 2020 WI 39, 391 Wis. 2d 196, 942 N.W.2d 302 (Ziegler, J., dissenting). And, as I stated in my dissent to this court's order denying Rule Petition 19-10, In the Matter of Amending Supreme Court Rules Pertaining to Permanent Revocation of a License to Practice Law in Attorney Disciplinary Proceedings, I believe there may be rare and unusual cases that would warrant the permanent revocation of an attorney's license to practice law. See S. Ct. Order 19-10 (issued Dec. 18, 2019) (Ziegler, J., dissenting).

¶11 I am authorized to state that Justices REBECCA GRASSL BRADLEY, BRIAN HAGEDORN, and JILL J. KAROFSKY join this concurrence.

To continue reading

Request your trial

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT