Malicious lawsuits and Disciplinary Actions

Case: Office of Lawyer Regulation v. Alan D. Eisenberg (2010)

Website: http://www.wicourts.gov/services/public/lawyerreg/statuspublic/eisenberg.pdf

Facts: Attorney Alan Eisenberg was disciplined four times in his career ranging from 1966 to 2007, the last case resulting in this decision. Attorney Eisenberg allegedly participated in misconduct arising from his representation of client W.D. in 2000. W.D. was acquitted of second-degree recklessly endangering safety, battery, and disorderly conduct. The day after the client was acquitted, Attorney Eisenberg filed a civil complaint on behalf of his client, W.D., against M.D., his client’s estranged wife. W.D. and M.D. were in the process of divorce, which Attorney Eisenberg also represented W.D. In the civil complaint, M.D. was alleged to falsify statements to the police causing false arrest of W.D. and malicious prosecution. Then, having committed perjury in her testimony in the criminal case against W.D, defaming W.D.’s character, thereby ruining his reputation. On the day of the pretrial conference for the divorce proceeding, Attorney Eisenberg approached M.D.’s lawyer, Brad Wilcox, to serve his client with the summons and complaint for the civil suit, then exclaimed that M.D. was a “liar and a perjurer” repeatedly. Attorney Eisenberg then provided a copy of the complaint to the local newspaper and relayed a story about the jurors from the criminal case “stormed the judge’s chambers and asking that M.D. be prosecuted for perjury”. Based on this information provided by Attorney Eisenberg, the story was published. M.D. then retained Attorney Raymond Krek for her defense. He filed an answer to the allegations in the complaint and also filed counterclaims against W.D. The civil case against M.D. was eventually dismissed. M.D. and W.D. then were ordered mediation for their divorce case at Attorney Eisenberg’s urging. However, on the day of the mediation, Attorney Eisenberg did not show up and W.D. was granted a default judgement. Attorney Eisenberg then appealed that judgement, but it was dismissed. Attorney Krek then filed a motion for relief against Attorney Eisenberg under Wisconsin Statute 802.05 and 814.025.

Issue: This court must determine if Attorney Eisenberg participated in misconduct per Wisconsin Statute 802.05 and 814.025 by bringing the frivolous and malicious lawsuit again M.D. in the name of his client, W.D.

Rule of law: Wisconsin Statute 802.05 and 814.025

Holding: Attorney Eisenberg was found guilty of malicious prosecution against M.D. thru his frivolous lawsuit regarding defamation and ruining W.D.’s reputation and his harassment of M.D. through intimidation and his cross examination during hearings