KENOSHA, Wis. — A local attorney has advertised on billboards noticed by much of the Kenosha legal community, on his website, and even on a magnet affixed to the side of his personal vehicle that he has obtained “thousands of charges dismissed” for clients. When Kenosha County Eye contacted him and asked how that number was calculated, the question went unanswered.

Attorney Michael Forella was licensed to practice law in Wisconsin on May 20, 2019. A review of publicly available court records, combined with a mathematical analysis of his caseload, raises questions about how the “thousands” claim could be calculated.

What the Court Record Shows

Wisconsin’s Consolidated Court Automation Programs database — commonly known as CCAP or WCCA — is the state’s public court records system. According to CCAP, Forella appears on approximately 557 cases across traffic, misdemeanor, and felony categories. Of those, about 108 remain open, leaving roughly 449 resolved cases currently visible in the public record.

Open cases generally cannot yet be counted toward final case outcomes because they have not been fully resolved. While it is possible for some charges to be dismissed during the life of a case — for example when counts are dismissed at a plea hearing while the case remains open pending sentencing — the vast majority of dismissal outcomes occur in cases that have already been completed. As a result, closed cases provide the clearest basis for evaluating historical results.

CCAP does not capture every case an attorney may have handled. Misdemeanor cases dismissed more than two years ago are removed from the system. Cases dismissed in their entirety with expungement also disappear from public view. A small number of other circumstances can also create gaps in the record.

Even accounting for those limitations, however, the publicly visible record provides a useful baseline for evaluating Forella’s advertising claim.

Breaking Down the Numbers

Forella has been licensed for roughly six years. For the first three of those years, from 2019 through 2022, he worked for a small law firm as a young attorney. Since 2022, he has operated a general practice that handles criminal defense alongside other areas of law, meaning criminal cases represent only a portion of his workload.

If the phrase “thousands of charges dismissed” is interpreted conservatively as meaning at least 2,000 dismissed charges, the math becomes significant.

With roughly 449 resolved cases visible in CCAP, reaching 2,000 dismissals would require an average of more than four charges dismissed per case — assuming every case contained that many counts and every one of those counts was dismissed.

Looking at the timeline another way, reaching 2,000 dismissals across roughly six years of practice would require approximately 333 dismissed charges per year. That works out to about 28 dismissed charges every month, or roughly six to seven dismissed charges every week for the entirety of his legal career.

Those figures would include the period when Forella was a young attorney early in his career and the years in which his practice expanded into areas beyond criminal defense.

A Career Comparison

For context, a Kenosha-area criminal defense attorney with more than 20 years of experience told Kenosha County Eye that he has obtained approximately 2,000 felony and misdemeanor charge dismissals over the course of his career. That attorney’s practice has been focused only on criminal defense and spans roughly 13 years longer than Forella’s.

Reaching a similar number within a career of roughly six years would require a significantly faster pace of dismissals than what that longtime practitioner described from two decades devoted exclusively to criminal defense work.

How “Dismissed Charges” Are Often Counted

In Wisconsin criminal practice, it is common for some charges to be dismissed as part of negotiated plea agreements. A defendant charged with multiple counts may plead guilty to one charge while several others are dismissed.

Those dismissed counts may still be included in a lawyer’s tally of “charges dismissed,” even though the case itself resulted in a conviction and sentence on another count.

Several attorneys familiar with Kenosha County criminal practice, speaking to Kenosha County Eye without authorization for direct attribution, said advertising claims based on counting individual dismissed counts are not uncommon. However, they said the “thousands” figure used in Forella’s advertising struck them as difficult to reconcile with the length of his career and his mixed practice areas.

Some attorneys also noted that consumers seeing a claim like “thousands of charges dismissed” might assume it refers to thousands of successful case outcomes, when it may instead refer to individual counts dismissed during plea negotiations.

Statements on Firm Website

Forella’s website also contains several statements describing the scope of his legal work and the structure of his firm.

The site refers to “our team of local Kenosha lawyers and Racine attorneys” providing services across multiple areas of law. As far as Kenosha County Eye is aware, Forella is currently the only attorney practicing at the firm.

Wisconsin Supreme Court Rules governing attorney advertising prohibit lawyers from making false or misleading statements about their services. Under SCR 20:7.1 and SCR 20:7.5, marketing materials may not create a misleading impression about the size of a firm or the lawyers practicing within it.

The website also states that Forella has “won numerous trials,” achieved dismissals before trial, and overturned issues on appeal that other lawyers overlooked. The site does not provide details about the number or type of cases referenced.

Another section of the website states that Forella has provided legal expertise in matters involving the Golden State Warriors and several NFL athletes. The website does not provide additional information describing the nature of those representations.

Use of Kenosha County Eye Photographs

Kenosha County Eye also identified three photographs on Forella’s website that were taken by this publication and are subject to Kenosha County Eye’s copyright. Kenosha County Eye does not recall granting permission for those images to be used for promotional purposes on a law firm’s website.

Wisconsin Supreme Court Rule Chapter 61 governs electronic media and still photography of court proceedings and includes a provision stating that images or recordings from court proceedings may not be used for advertising or promotional purposes.

Kenosha County Eye has not determined whether the photographs on Forella’s website were obtained directly from courtroom coverage governed by that rule. However, the use of copyrighted images taken by this publication for law firm marketing purposes raised additional questions during the course of reporting.

Under federal copyright law, photographs are automatically protected by copyright upon creation, and reproduction of those images for commercial use typically requires permission from the copyright holder.

Forella’s Response

Kenosha County Eye contacted Forella and asked how he calculated the “thousands of charges dismissed” figure used in his advertising. Forella responded to the email and answered another question included in the message but did not address the question about how the dismissal number was calculated.

State Rules Governing Attorney Advertising

Attorney advertising in Wisconsin is governed by Wisconsin Supreme Court Rule 20:7.1. The rule prohibits lawyers from making false or misleading communications about their services.

Under SCR 20:7.1, a statement can be considered misleading if it creates unjustified expectations about results or omits information necessary to prevent a materially false impression, even if the individual words in the statement could technically be accurate.

The rule applies to all forms of advertising, including billboards, websites, vehicle signage, and other marketing materials.

Complaints regarding potential violations of the rule can be filed with the Wisconsin Office of Lawyer Regulation.

Relationship With Kenosha County Prosecutor

During part of his career practicing in Kenosha County, Forella was in a personal relationship with an assistant district attorney in the Kenosha County District Attorney’s Office. That individual is now believed to work in Milwaukee County.

Kenosha County Eye found no evidence that the relationship resulted in preferential treatment in Kenosha County or elsewhere. Romantic relationships between defense attorneys and prosecutors are not prohibited under Wisconsin’s Rules of Professional Conduct so long as no conflicts arise in specific cases.

The Advertising Remains Live

As of publication, Forella’s website and the magnet on the side of his vehicle continue to display the “thousands of charges dismissed” claim.

Public court records currently show approximately 108 open cases associated with Forella in CCAP.

Forella did not provide documentation supporting the claim when given the opportunity to explain how the number was calculated.