Office of Lawyer Regulation v. Peter James Nickitas
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
2023 WI 78 SUPREME COURT OF WISCONSIN CASE NO.: 2023AP1294-D COMPLETE TITLE: In the Matter of Disciplinary Proceedings Against Peter James Nickitas, Attorney at Law: Office of Lawyer Regulation, Complainant, v. Peter James Nickitas, Respondent. DISCIPLINARY PROCEEDINGS AGAINST NICKITAS OPINION FILED: SUBMITTED ON BRIEFS: ORAL ARGUMENT: SOURCE OF APPEAL: COURT: COUNTY: JUDGE: JUSTICES: Per curiam. ATTORNEYS: December 15, 2023 2023 WI 78 NOTICE This opinion is subject to further editing and modification. The final version will appear in the bound volume of the official reports. No. 2023AP1294-D STATE OF WISCONSIN : IN SUPREME COURT In the Matter of Disciplinary Proceedings Against Peter James Nickitas, Attorney at Law: FILED Office of Lawyer Regulation, Complainant, DEC 15, 2023 v. Samuel A. Christensen Clerk of Supreme Court Peter James Nickitas, Respondent. ATTORNEY disciplinary proceeding. Attorney's license suspended. ¶1 PER CURIAM. This is a reciprocal discipline matter. On July 21, 2023, the Office of Lawyer Regulation (OLR) filed a complaint 22.22, and asking motion, this pursuant court to to Supreme suspend Court Attorney Rule (SCR) Peter James Nickitas's license to practice law in Wisconsin for a period of 120 days, as discipline Supreme Court of Minnesota. reciprocal to that imposed by the No. ¶2 2023AP1294-D On September 19, 2023, in response to OLR's motion, this court issued an order directing Attorney Nickitas to show cause, in writing, within twenty days, why the imposition of discipline reciprocal unwarranted. to that imposed to Minnesota would be On October 3, 2023, Attorney Nickitas filed a response to this court's motion. object in the imposition of Attorney Nickitas does not reciprocal discipline, but he requests that the 120-day suspension be applied retroactively so as to run coterminous with the term of his Minnesota suspension. On October 11, 2023, OLR filed a response opposing a retroactive suspension. Upon review of the matter, we decline to make the 120-day suspension retroactive. ¶3 Attorney Nickitas Wisconsin in 1991. Minnesota. was admitted to practice law in He is also admitted to practice law in His most recent address on file with the State Bar of Wisconsin is in Saint Paul, Minnesota. ¶4 Attorney Nickitas's professional disciplinary history in Wisconsin consists of a 90-day suspension imposed in 2006, reciprocal to a suspension in Minnesota, see In re Disciplinary Proceedings Against Nickitas, 2006 WI 20, 289 Wis. 2d 18, 710 N.W.2d 464, and a 30-day suspension imposed reciprocal to a suspension in Minnesota. in 2014, also See In re Disciplinary Proceedings Against Nickitas, 2014 WI 12, 352 Wis. 2d 641, 843 N.W.2d 438. ¶5 On January 11, 2023, the Supreme Court of Minnesota suspended Attorney Nickitas's Minnesota law license for 120 days for using profane, abusive, and 2 obscene language while communicating comments with about a court staff, judge, and influence on a judge. making false attempting to No. 2023AP1294-D and disparaging exert improper Attorney Nickitas timely notified OLR of the Minnesota suspension. ¶6 "shall Supreme Court Rule 22.22(3) provides that this court impose the identical discipline or license suspension unless . . . [t]he procedure in the other jurisdiction was so lacking in notice or opportunity to be heard as to constitute a deprivation of due process"; "[t]here was such an infirmity of proof establishing the misconduct . . . that the supreme court could not accept as final the conclusion in respect to the misconduct . . ."; or "[t]he misconduct justifies substantially different discipline in this state." ¶7 Attorney Nickitas has not claimed that any of these three exceptions exist and, as noted, he does not oppose the imposition of reciprocal discipline. His only argument is that the 120-day suspension in Wisconsin should be made retroactive to the term of the Minnesota suspension because he says he was not practicing law in Wisconsin during that time. ¶8 In opposing the request for a retroactive suspension, OLR notes that Attorney Nickitas made an identical request when reciprocal discipline was last imposed in 2014. Attorney Nickitas's purported voluntary OLR says that cessation of the practice of law in Wisconsin during the term of his Minnesota suspension does not warrant retroactive suspension imposed by this court. OLR's reasoning. Suspensions 3 application of the As in 2014, we agree with are generally not imposed No. 2023AP1294-D retroactively, and there are no special circumstances present in this case that would warrant a retroactive suspension. ¶9 IT IS ORDERED that the license of Peter James Nickitas to practice law in Wisconsin is suspended for a period of 120 days, effective January 19, 2024. ¶10 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Peter James Nickitas shall comply with the provisions of SCR 22.26 concerning the duties of a person whose license to practice law in Wisconsin has been suspended. ¶11 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that compliance conditions of this order is required for reinstatement. 22.28(2). 4 with all See SCR No. 1 2023AP1294-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.
