In the Matter of Disciplinary Proceedings Against James Eric Goldmann, Attorney at Law:
James Eric Goldmann, Respondent. Office of Lawyer Regulation, Complainant,
PROCEEDINGS AGAINST GOLDMANN
disciplinary proceeding. Attorney's license
We review a stipulation filed by the Office of Lawyer
Regulation (OLR) and Attorney James Eric Goldmann pursuant to
SCR 22.12. In the stipulation, Attorney Goldmann does
not contest that he committed all 38 acts of professional
misconduct alleged by the OLR. He also does not contest that
the revocation of his Wisconsin law license is appropriate
discipline for his misconduct, along with a requirement that
he comply with a monetary judgment obtained against him by a
client regarding unearned advance fees.
After fully reviewing the matter, we approve the stipulation
and revoke Attorney Goldmann's Wisconsin law license. His
transgressions leave us no choice: Attorney Goldmann has
shown himself to be unwilling or unable to conform his
conduct to the standards that are required to practice law in
this state. We also adopt the stipulated requirement that he
comply with his client's monetary judgment against him.
Finally, because this matter is being resolved without the
appointment of a referee, and because the OLR has not sought
costs, we impose no costs.
Attorney Goldmann was admitted to the State Bar of Wisconsin
in 2013. His most recent address on file with the State Bar
of Wisconsin is in Milwaukee, Wisconsin. According to the
parties' stipulation, Attorney Goldmann currently lives
in Canada, but made use of a general delivery address in
Milwaukee and an email account to receive the case documents
in this matter.
Attorney Goldmann's license to practice law in Wisconsin
is currently suspended. On June 15, 2017, this court
temporarily suspended his law license for his willful failure
to cooperate with the OLR investigation of this matter. In
October 2017, his law license was administratively suspended
for failure to pay bar dues and assessments and failure to
file the required trust account certification. The parties
report that Attorney Goldmann abandoned the practice of law
Attorney Goldmann's work in ten client matters gave rise
to all but one of the misconduct claims in this case. It is
not necessary to describe the particular factual allegations
of Attorney Goldmann's misconduct in each client matter;
a synopsis will suffice. Beginning in 2015 and continuing
into 2017, Attorney Goldmann effectively abandoned the ten
clients identified in the OLR's complaint: M.G. (Counts
1-4); S.M.C. (Counts 5-7); A.L.R. (Counts 8-11); E.G.H.
(Counts 12-16); C.H. (Counts 17-21); R.C.M. (Counts 22-23);
R.D.S. (Counts 24-26); A.P. (Counts 27-30); S.D.Y. (Counts
31-33); and M.D.C. (Counts 34-37). Attorney Goldmann
undertook to represent these clients in a variety of
matters--criminal cases, civil cases, parental rights cases,
etc.--but he failed to take necessary actions on their
behalf. Among other things, he failed to attend court
hearings; failed to file crucial documents; failed to comply
with court orders; failed to forward his clients' case
files to the clients or successor counsel; failed to refund
unearned advance fees; failed to be forthright about his
actions; and failed to respond to his clients' requests
for information or otherwise keep them updated on their
cases. Once the aggrieved clients contacted the OLR, he
failed to cooperate with the OLR's investigation.
The remaining misconduct claim in this case (Count 38)
concerns certain false and misleading information that
Attorney Goldmann gave his employing law firm about his level
of professional experience and success. The firm included
this information on its website, with Attorney Goldmann's
knowledge and understanding.
Based on the foregoing, the OLR complaint alleged, and the
parties later stipulated, as follows:
• Contrary to SCR 20:1.3,  Attorney Goldmann failed to act
with reasonable diligence and promptness in representing a
client in the following client matters: M.G. (Count 1),
A.L.R. (Count 8), E.G.H. (Count 12), C.H. (Count 17), R.C.M.
(Count 22), A.P. (Count 27), S.D.Y. (Count 31), and M.D.C.
• Contrary to SCR 20:1.4(a)(3) and (4),  Attorney Goldmann
failed to keep the following clients reasonably informed
about the status of their matters and failed to promptly
comply with the clients' reasonable requests for
information: A.L.R. (Count 9), E.G.H. (Count 13), C.H. (Count
18), A.P. (Count 28), S.D.Y. (Count 32), and M.D.C. (Count
• Contrary to SCR 20:1.5(b)(1) and (2),  Attorney Goldmann
failed to communicate to R.D.S. in writing the scope of his
representation, the basis or rate of his fees and expenses,
or the purpose and effect of the advance fee paid to him
• Contrary to SCR 20:1.5(c),  Attorney Goldmann failed to
enter into a written contingent fee agreement with E.G.H.
• Contrary to SCR 20:1.16(d),  Attorney Goldmann failed to
timely return client files, or refund unearned fees, or
otherwise take steps to protect client interests during his
representation of M.G. (Count 2), A.L.R. (Count 10), C.H.
(Count 19), A.P. (Count 29), and M.D.C. (Count 36).
• Contrary to SCR 20:3.3(a)(1),  Attorney Goldmann knowingly
made a false statement of fact to a tribunal during his
representation of S.M.C. (Count 5).
• Contrary to SCR 20:3.4(c),  Attorney Goldmann
knowingly and without justification disobeyed a court's
order during his work on the E.G.H. matter (Count 15).
• Contrary to SCR 20:3.4(d),  Attorney Goldmann failed
to make a reasonably diligent effort to comply with a legally
proper discovery request during his work on the C.H. matter
• Contrary to SCR 20:7.1(a) and (b),  Attorney
Goldmann made false or misleading communications about
himself and his ...