Case(s) below are identified by caption and Commission case number. If there is more than one case, the cases are listed from most recent to oldest. A case may have more than one disposition or more than one component to a disposition, in which case each disposition and component is also listed separately within that case record, again in an order from most recent to oldest.

Click on

Case Research

to access any documents regarding this lawyer that are in our database. Case Research contains most disciplinary opinions of the Supreme Court and most disciplinary orders and board reports issued since 1990. If Case Research does not contain the information you are seeking, please contact the Commission's Clerk's Office for assistance. Contact information for the Clerk's office is available under Clerk's Office Services.

Disposition	Probation
Effective Date of Disposition	12/08/2017
End Date of Disposition	12/08/2018 Probationary condition(s) satisfied.
Definition of Disposition	Probation reflects a determination that the lawyer has engaged in misconduct, but also a finding that the lawyer may continue to practice law pursuant to specified conditions under ARDC supervision without posing a risk to the public, profession, or courts. As a result, the lawyer may continue to practice law during the period of probation, subject to the conditions imposed by the Court. Probation may be ordered for a specified period of time or for a specified period of time and until further order of the Court. Probation may be ordered in conjunction with a suspension, which may be stayed in whole or in part. A stay defers that portion of the suspension as long as the lawyer complies with probationary conditions. If the lawyer successfully completes probation, the lawyer is not actually suspended during any portion of the stayed suspension.

Disposition	Suspension for a specified period of time and until further order of the Court
Effective Date of Disposition	06/08/2017
End Date of Disposition	12/08/2017
Definition of Disposition	A suspension until further order of the Court reflects a determination that the lawyer has engaged in misconduct and that the misconduct warrants an interruption of the lawyer's authority to practice law during the suspension period, which is a fixed period of time identified in the Supreme Court's order and until the lawyer has demonstrated rehabilitation, good character, and current knowledge of the law in a subsequent reinstatement case. The lawyer is not authorized to practice law during the period of the suspension.
Case Summary	Mr. Isaacson, who was licensed in 1989, was suspended for one year and until further order of the Court, with the suspension stayed after six months by a probationary period of one year. He neglected a client matter, continued to file pleadings after he was terminated, commingled funds and failed to cooperate with the disciplinary investigation. The suspension is effective on June 8, 2017.

Disposition	Suspension for a specified period
Effective Date of Disposition	10/07/2008
End Date of Disposition	04/07/2009
Definition of Disposition	Suspension for a specified period reflects a determination that the lawyer has engaged in misconduct and that the misconduct warrants an interruption of the lawyer's authority to practice law during the suspension period, which is a fixed period of time identified in the Supreme Court's order. The lawyer is not authorized to practice law during the period of the suspension.
Case Summary	Mr. Isaacson, who was licensed in 1989, was suspended for six months. He neglected a personal injury matter. He was suspended in January 2008 for similar misconduct. The suspension is effective on October 7, 2008.

Disposition	Suspension for a specified period
Effective Date of Disposition	02/13/2008
End Date of Disposition	03/14/2008
Definition of Disposition	Suspension for a specified period reflects a determination that the lawyer has engaged in misconduct and that the misconduct warrants an interruption of the lawyer's authority to practice law during the suspension period, which is a fixed period of time identified in the Supreme Court's order. The lawyer is not authorized to practice law during the period of the suspension.
Case Summary	Mr. Isaacson, who was licensed in 1989, was suspended for thirty days. He neglected a client’s personal injury claim and initially failed to cooperate in the disciplinary proceeding. The suspension is effective on February 13, 2008.