The Wisconsin Supreme Court has upheld a three-year suspension of an attorney who videotaped himself having sex with a client's wife –- in the presence of the client -- finding his behavior a “serious breach” of professional obligations.

A disciplinary proceeding against Michael R. Inglimo, 48, of Superior included no fewer than three allegations of sexual misconduct -– two involving the wives of clients, the other involving a threesome with a client's girlfriend. He videotaped a June 2002 encounter with the wife of a client identified only as P.K., whom he had represented in various matters since 1997.

Wisconsin's Rules of Professional Conduct provide that “A lawyer shall not have sexual relations with a current client unless a consensual sexual relationship existed between them when the client-lawyer relationship commenced.”

Inglimo argued that his misbehavior, which also included use of marijuana and cocaine, was not particularly serious compared to the theft of client funds or other offenses directly related to the practice of law.

But the Supreme Court endorsed the three-year sanction recommended by a court-appointed referee, finding Inglimo “showed a disturbing pattern of disregard for the laws of this state and his professional obligations as an attorney” and

A substantial period of suspension is necessary in this case to impress upon Attorney Inglimo and other lawyers in this state the seriousness of the professional misconduct at issue here and to protect the public from similar misconduct in the future.

Both P.K. and his wife testified she had sex with Inglimo to pay him for legal services rendered to her and, according to P.K., it was taped to avoid any dispute that the bill had been paid in full.

Inglimo argued that he did not violate a conflict-of-interest rule because P.K.'s wife was not a client at the time. But the Supreme Court said it was “self-evident that an attorney's personal interest in having sex with the spouse of a client may materially limit the attorney's representation of that client.”

“Whether or not the client initially approved of the encounter, there is a substantial possibility that the episode is likely to create conflicts between the attorney and the client going forward,” the opinion concluded.

The court also adopted the referee's finding that Inglimo developed at least a “substantial social relationship” with the wife of a man he was representing in a divorce proceeding. He admitted having sex with the woman within a few days after her husband fired him.

As for Inglimo's threesome with a client identified as L.K. and his girlfriend, the Supreme Court cleared him of misconduct because “the evidence ... did not show that Attorney Inglimo had engaged in 'sexual relations' with client L.K.”

The Wisconsin Office of Lawyer Regulation had argued that the phrase “sexual relations with a current client” applies when the lawyer and the client both participate in a sexual act at the same time in the same place.

Inglimo, a graduate of John Marshall Law School in Chicago, was admitted to the Bar in 1985.

By Matthew Heller
10/22/07