Quimbee logo
DMCA.com Protection Status
  • I
  • In the Matter of ConstantIn the Matter of Constant
From our private database of 16,800+ case briefs...

In the Matter of Constant

Wisconsin Supreme Court
937 N.E.2d 599 (2020)


Facts

Personal injury lawyer Terry Constant practiced law for over 50 years without a disciplinary complaint. But when Constant bounced a check to a client written on his client trust account, the bank reported it to the Office of Lawyer Regulation (OLR). The OLR initiated an investigation and examined about five years’ worth of Constant’s past trust-account transactions. Constant provided the OLR with incomplete account and client records that sometimes conflicted with each other. Constant also told the OLR he had not withdrawn cash from the trust account, but the records showed he had made multiple cash withdrawals as well as transferred funds electronically to his business account just before he bounced the check. Despite using Quicken, Constant’s ledgers did not accurately track balances or the dates, amounts, and clients associated with transactions. Records from earlier years showed he disbursed funds on behalf of a particular client, including a check written to Constant himself, before depositing funds for that client’s case into the trust account. Over time, Constant had repeatedly withdrawn cash or transferred funds out without identifying the purpose or client. At one point, the trust-account balance fell more than $30,000 below what should have remained in the trust account for one client alone. To cut checks for that client, Constant had to deposit funds that belonged to another client. The OLR filed a complaint charging Constant with misconduct under the rules governing client trust accounts and safekeeping client funds. Constant took a “no harm, no foul” attitude as his clients and their lienholders had eventually received full payment, and blamed the accounting errors on Quicken and the bank. The referee concluded that Constant committed eight serious rule violations and recommended a five-month suspension, plus additional continuing legal education (CLE) with six hours related to trust-account management, and continued monitoring of his trust account. Constant appealed, and the OLR cross-appealed, requesting a one-year suspension instead of only five months.

Rule of Law

Issue

Holding and Reasoning (Per curiam.)

What to do next…

  1. Unlock this case brief with a free (no-commitment) trial membership of Quimbee.

    You’ll be in good company: Quimbee is one of the most widely used and trusted sites for law students, serving more than 450,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools—such as Yale, Vanderbilt, Berkeley, and the University of Illinois—even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students. Read our student testimonials.

  2. Learn more about Quimbee’s unique (and proven) approach to achieving great grades at law school.

    Quimbee is a company hell-bent on one thing: helping you get an “A” in every course you take in law school, so you can graduate at the top of your class and get a high-paying law job. We’re not just a study aid for law students; we’re the study aid for law students. Read more about Quimbee.

Here's why 450,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:

  • Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 16,800 briefs, keyed to 224 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
  • The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
  • Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
  • Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.

Questions & Answers


Have a question about this case?

Sign up for a free 7-day trial and ask it

Sign up for a FREE 7-day trial