disciplinary handbook: volume v - Supreme Court - State of Ohio

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Larson, Cincinnati Bar Assn. v. 124 Ohio St.3d 249, 2009-Ohio-6766. Decided 12/30/2009. Case Summaries- 172 Respondent misled one client, failed to perform duties for that client and two others, failed to return unearned fees to all three clients, and failed to cooperate in two ensuing disciplinary investigations. Board adopted the panel‘s findings and recommendations, but not the panel‘s recommendation of a two-year suspension all stayed with conditions. As to Count I, respondent was hired in July 2006 to file a divorce. The client paid $1,000 and provided all the documentation, but respondent did not file the complaint. The client, in September 2006, filed her own CPO petition against her then-incarcerated husband, and asked for the exclusive use of her husband‘s truck which the court did not grant. After the husband was released from prison, the husband filed charges alleging his wife used the truck without authorization. The client attended two municipal court hearings and signed waiver of counsel. Respondent insisted he defended her. The client, after sending respondent a letter in January 2007 and demanding he proceed with the divorce or return the $1,000 fee, filed a suit against him in small claims court. The court continued two hearing dates on his request, but he never appeared. A default judgment was granted against respondent awarding the client $1,000 plus $85 in court costs. He paid it only after a bailiff issued a writ of execution. Board found violations of DR 7-101(A)(1), (2), and (3), DR 9- 102(B)(4) and it counterpart Prof.Cond.R. 1.15(d), and Gov.Bar R. V(4)(G) for failure to respond to relator‘s letters of inquiry and coming unprepared for a deposition. As to Count II, in January 2007, respondent was paid $300 to defend a client in mayor‘s court on traffic citations. The client feared her drivers‘ license would be suspended because she had failed to appear at one court date. He advised her that he would arrange for the court to forgive the failure to appear, drop a peeling tires citation, and reduce her speeding ticket to avoid adding points to record. In mid- February, the client received notice of her license suspension and of the required fee to reinstate it. She consulted respondent who advised her that the notice was a mistake and not to pay the reinstatement fee. When she continued to register concerns, he assured her he was working with a prosecutor and would resolve it. In mid- March 2007, she received a notice of a warrant for her arrest. She consulted respondent and he told her if she had to drive to ―drive safely.‖ In April 2007, the client contacted the major‘s court and paid the fee. In May, she wrote to respondent and asked for a $300 refund, but he did not promptly return the unearned fee and he stopped returning the client‘s calls. Board found a violation of Prof.Cond.R. 1.1, 1.3, 1.4(a)(3), 1.15(d), 8.4(c), and Gov.Bar R. V(4)(G) for failing to respond to relator‘s inquiry and being unprepared for a deposition. As to Count III, respondent was paid $250 to represent a client in a juvenile court proceeding. He said he would obtain a continuance of an October court date, but he failed to do so, and when the client failed to appear, the court issued a bench warrant for the client‘s arrest. He did nothing and failed to promptly refund unearned fees. Board found violations of Prof.Cond.R. 1.3, 1.4, and 1.15(d). In mitigation, there was no record of prior discipline; there was medical evidence to show he had a debilitating sleep disorder that compromised his energy level and focus and that with treatment his concentration and productivity has improved; and judges, pursuant to subpoena, provided favorable assessments of his character and competence, although they commented he was at times late for court. BCGD Proc.Reg. 10(B)(2)(a), (e). Respondent testified that he had started using new scheduling software and had been interviewing candidates for office assistant. He attributed his problems to expanding the number of cases and jurisdictions covered, but the board noted this does not explain his misrepresentation to the Count II client. Not until an exchange with a panel member did respondent acknowledge having misled his client. Even if his busy workload contributed to his misconduct, his hearing testimony showed that he had made few concrete changes. His goals to limit the number of cases, the counties in which he practiced, and his time out of the office remain largely aspirational. Also weighing as aggravating factors, there was a pattern of misconduct that caused all three clients harm, and put two at risk of arrest; he failed to respond to relator‘s investigation until compelled by relator, and the board doubted, given his evasive answers that he accepted responsibility for his misconduct. BCGD Proc.Reg. 10(B)(1)(c), (e), and (h). Board recommended a two-year suspension, with 18 months stayed on conditions of no further misconduct and completion of continuing legal education courses in managing his law office, his caseload, and his time. The court accepted the
Case Summaries- 173 Board‘s findings and recommendations, but not the recommended sanction. The court ordered a twoyear suspension, one year stayed under conditions of no further misconduct, and in addition to required CLE complete 12 hours of CLE training in law-office, caseload, and time management, and complete a one-year monitored probation under the auspices of a lawyer appointed by relator. In dissent, the Chief Justice would have imposed a two-year suspension, without stay. Rules Violated: Prof.Cond.R. 1.1, 1.3, 1.4, 1.4(a)(3), 1.15(d), 8.4(c); DR 7-101(A)(1), 7-101(A)(2), 7- 101(A)(3), 9-102(B)(4); Gov.Bar R. V(4)(G) Aggravation: (c), (e), (h) Mitigation: (a), (e) Prior Discipline: NO Procedure/ Process Issues: NO Criminal Conduct: NO Public Official: NO Sanction: Two-year suspension, 12 months stayed
Page 1 and 2:
The Supreme Court of Ohio Board of
Page 3 and 4:
Table of Cases Table of Cases- 1 [F
Page 5 and 6:
Drain, Cuyahoga Cty. Bar Assn. v. 1
Page 7 and 8:
Horton, Disciplinary Counsel v. 124
Page 9 and 10:
Markovich, Akron Bar Assn. v. 117 O
Page 11 and 12:
Table of Cases- 9 Ramos, Cleveland
Page 13 and 14:
Table of Cases- 11 Stuard, Becker,
Page 15 and 16:
Case Summaries Allerding, Columbus
Page 17 and 18:
Case Summaries- 15 Archer, Northwes
Page 19 and 20:
Case Summaries- 17 intermittently o
Page 21 and 22:
Bartels, Allen Cty. Bar Assn. v. 12
Page 23 and 24:
Blair, Disciplinary Counsel v. 128
Page 25 and 26:
Case Summaries- 23 Bowling, Discipl
Page 27 and 28:
Broschak, Disciplinary Counsel v. 1
Page 29 and 30:
Brown, Dayton Bar Assn. v. 124 Ohio
Page 31 and 32:
Brown, Allen Cty. Bar Assn. v. 124
Page 33 and 34:
Brueggeman, Disciplinary Counsel v.
Page 35 and 36:
Bunstine, Disciplinary Counsel v. 1
Page 37 and 38:
Bursey, Disciplinary Counsel v. 124
Page 39 and 40:
Butler, Disciplinary Counsel v. 128
Page 41 and 42:
Campbell, Disciplinary Counsel v. 1
Page 43 and 44:
Cantrell, Disciplinary Counsel v. 1
Page 45 and 46:
Cantrell, Disciplinary Counsel v. 1
Page 47 and 48:
Case Summaries- 45 abuse impede his
Page 49 and 50:
Case Summaries- 47 respondent‘s d
Page 51 and 52:
Case Summaries- 49 with a client if
Page 53 and 54:
Case Summaries- 51 not DR 1-102(A)(
Page 55 and 56:
Clovis, Columbus Bar Assn. v. 125 O
Page 57 and 58:
Corrigan, Geauga Cty. Bar Assn. v.
Page 59 and 60:
Cunningham, Butler Cty. Bar Assn. v
Page 61 and 62:
Davis, Disciplinary Counsel v. 121
Page 63 and 64:
Dawson, Cleveland Metropolitan Bar
Page 65 and 66:
DeLoach, Akron Bar Assn. v. 130 Ohi
Page 67 and 68:
Detweiler, Disciplinary Counsel v.
Page 69 and 70:
DiCato, Akron Bar Assn. v. 130 Ohio
Page 71 and 72:
DiMartino, Mahoning Cty. Bar Assn.
Page 73 and 74:
Doellman, Disciplinary Counsel v. 1
Page 75 and 76:
Drain, Cuyahoga Cty. Bar Assn. v. 1
Page 77 and 78:
Ellis, Columbus Bar Assn. v. 120 Oh
Page 79 and 80:
Emerson, Cincinnati Bar Assn. v. 12
Page 81 and 82:
Farah, Toledo Bar Assn. v. 125 Ohio
Page 83 and 84:
Farrell, Cincinnati Bar Assn. v. 12
Page 85 and 86:
Fink, Akron Bar Assn. v. 131 Ohio S
Page 87 and 88:
Folwell, Disciplinary Counsel v. 12
Page 89 and 90:
Freedman, Akron Bar Assn. v. 128 Oh
Page 91 and 92:
Freeman, Disciplinary Counsel v. 12
Page 93 and 94:
Freeman, Disciplinary Counsel v. 11
Page 95 and 96:
Frost, Disciplinary Counsel v. 122
Page 97 and 98:
Case Summaries- 95 his goal of gain
Page 99 and 100:
Gibson, Akron Bar Assn. v. 128 Ohio
Page 101 and 102:
Glaeser, Cuyahoga Cty. Bar Assn. v.
Page 103 and 104:
Goldblatt, Disciplinary Counsel v.
Page 105 and 106:
Gottehrer, Cleveland Metro. Bar Ass
Page 107 and 108:
Case Summaries- 105 disgorgement of
Page 109 and 110:
Grote, Cincinnati Bar Assn. v. 127
Page 111 and 112:
Hackett, Cincinnati Bar Assn. v. 12
Page 113 and 114:
Case Summaries- 111 presented evide
Page 115 and 116:
Hanni, Mahoning Cty. Bar Assn. v. 1
Page 117 and 118:
Hauck, Cincinnati Bar Assn. v. 129
Page 119 and 120:
Heiland, Disciplinary Counsel v. 11
Page 121 and 122:
Heisler, Cincinnati Bar Assn. v. 11
Page 123 and 124: Henry, Disciplinary Counsel v. 127
Page 125 and 126: Hickman, Toledo Bar Assn. v. 119 Oh
Page 127 and 128: Hildebrand, Cleveland Metro. Bar As
Page 129 and 130: Holda, Akron Bar Assn. v. 125 Ohio
Page 131 and 132: Horan, Disciplinary Counsel v. 123
Page 133 and 134: Hoskins, Disciplinary Counsel v. 11
Page 135 and 136: Howard, Disciplinary Counsel v. 123
Page 137 and 138: Hunter, Columbus Bar Assn. v. 130 O
Page 139 and 140: Jackel, Ohio State Bar Assn. v. 118
Page 141 and 142: Jackson, Disciplinary Counsel v. 12
Page 143 and 144: Jaffe, Cleveland Metro Bar Assn. v.
Page 145 and 146: Johnson, Toledo Bar Assn. v. 121 Oh
Page 147 and 148: Johnson, Cuyahoga Cty. Bar Assn. v.
Page 149 and 150: Johnston, Disciplinary Counsel v. 1
Page 151 and 152: Jones, Mahoning Cty. Bar Assn. v. 1
Page 153 and 154: Kaplan, Cleveland Metro. Bar Assn.
Page 155 and 156: Kealy, Cleveland Metro. Bar Assn. v
Page 157 and 158: Kellogg-Martin, Disciplinary Counse
Page 159 and 160: Kelly, Disciplinary Counsel. v. 121
Page 161 and 162: Case Summaries- 159 other assets in
Page 163 and 164: Case Summaries- 161 none of the mon
Page 165 and 166: Case Summaries- 163 Although the un
Page 167 and 168: Kubyn, Lake Cty. Bar Assn. v. 121 O
Page 169 and 170: Landis, Disciplinary Counsel v. 124
Page 171 and 172: Lapine, Disciplinary Counsel v. 128
Page 173: Larkin, Columbus Bar Assn. v. 128 O
Page 177 and 178: Lawson, Cincinnati Bar Assn. v. 119
Page 179 and 180: Lawson, Cincinnati Bar Assn. v. 130
Page 181 and 182: Lentes, Disciplinary Counsel v. 120
Page 183 and 184: Lewis, Medina Cty. Bar Assn. v. 121
Page 185 and 186: Case Summaries- 183 and blame the w
Page 187 and 188: Longino, Disciplinary Counsel v. 12
Page 189 and 190: Lowden, Toledo Bar Assn. v. 117 Ohi
Page 191 and 192: Case Summaries- 189 8.4(h) by his a
Page 193 and 194: Mamich, Disciplinary Counsel v. 125
Page 195 and 196: Manning, Disciplinary Counsel v. 11
Page 197 and 198: Marosan, Stark Cty. Bar Assn. v. 11
Page 199 and 200: Martin, Toledo Bar Assn. v. 131 Ohi
Page 201 and 202: Mason, Toledo Bar Assn. v. 118 Ohio
Page 203 and 204: McAuliffe, Disciplinary Counsel v.
Page 205 and 206: McCord, Disciplinary Counsel v. 121
Page 207 and 208: McFaul, Cleveland Metro. Bar Assn.
Page 209 and 210: Case Summaries- 207 withdrawal. Res
Page 211 and 212: Case Summaries- 209 that he is comp
Page 213 and 214: Meade, Disciplinary Counsel v. 127
Page 215 and 216: Miller, Disciplinary Counsel v. 126
Page 217 and 218: Minamyer, Butler Cty. Bar Assn. v.
Page 219 and 220: Case Summaries- 217 represent his c
Page 221 and 222: Case Summaries- 219 became effectiv
Page 223 and 224: Mitchell, Disciplinary Counsel v. 1
Page 225 and 226:
Mullaney, Brooking, and Moeves, Cin
Page 227 and 228:
Murraine, Disciplinary Counsel v. 1
Page 229 and 230:
Nance, Cleveland Metropolitan Bar A
Page 231 and 232:
Newcomer, Disciplinary Counsel v. 1
Page 233 and 234:
Newman, Cincinnati Bar Assn. v. 124
Page 235 and 236:
Niermeyer, Disciplinary Counsel v.
Page 237 and 238:
Nittskoff, Disciplinary Counsel. v.
Page 239 and 240:
Case Summaries- 237 Master Commissi
Page 241 and 242:
Ohlin, Disciplinary Counsel v. 126
Page 243 and 244:
O’Malley, Disciplinary Counsel v.
Page 245 and 246:
Case Summaries- 243 conditions that
Page 247 and 248:
Patterson, Geauga Cty. Bar Assn. v.
Page 249 and 250:
Peskin, Ohio State Bar Assn. v. 125
Page 251 and 252:
Case Summaries- 249 met by imposing
Page 253 and 254:
Plough, Disciplinary Counsel v. 126
Page 255 and 256:
Podor, Cleveland Metro. Bar Assn. v
Page 257 and 258:
Portman, Butler Cty. Bar Assn. v. 1
Page 259 and 260:
Potter, Disciplinary Counsel v. 126
Page 261 and 262:
Pullins, Disciplinary Counsel v. 12
Page 263 and 264:
Case Summaries- 261 disqualificatio
Page 265 and 266:
Randall, Dayton Bar Assn. v. 118 Oh
Page 267 and 268:
Case Summaries- 265 history, no dis
Page 269 and 270:
Raso, Disciplinary Counsel v. 129 O
Page 271 and 272:
Resnick, Ohio State Bar Assn. v. 12
Page 273 and 274:
Ricketts, Disciplinary Counsel v. 1
Page 275 and 276:
Ridenbaugh, Disciplinary Counsel v.
Page 277 and 278:
Ritson, Toledo Bar Assn. v. 127 Ohi
Page 279 and 280:
Roberts, Disciplinary Counsel v. 11
Page 281 and 282:
Robinson, Disciplinary Counsel v. 1
Page 283 and 284:
Rohrer, Disciplinary Counsel v. 124
Page 285 and 286:
Rozanc, Lake Cty. Bar Assn. v. 123
Page 287 and 288:
Rust, Toledo Bar Assn. v. 124 Ohio
Page 289 and 290:
Sabol, Disciplinary Counsel v. 118
Page 291 and 292:
Case Summaries- 289 condition of th
Page 293 and 294:
Sanz, Cincinnati Bar Assn. v. 128 O
Page 295 and 296:
Saunders, Greene Cty. Bar Assn. v.
Page 297 and 298:
Sayler, Cleveland Metro. Bar Assn.
Page 299 and 300:
Case Summaries- 297 1.5(a), 1.16(d)
Page 301 and 302:
Schram, Dayton Bar Assn. v. 122 Ohi
Page 303 and 304:
Scott, Toledo Bar Assn. v. 129 Ohio
Page 305 and 306:
Shaw, Disciplinary Counsel v. 126 O
Page 307 and 308:
Shea, Columbus Bar Assn. v. 117 Ohi
Page 309 and 310:
Shuler, Disciplinary Counsel v. 129
Page 311 and 312:
Siewert, Disciplinary Counsel. v. 1
Page 313 and 314:
Simon, Disciplinary Counsel v. 128
Page 315 and 316:
Smith, Disciplinary Counsel v. 124
Page 317 and 318:
Smith, Disciplinary Counsel v. 128
Page 319 and 320:
Smithern, Akron Bar Assn. v. 125 Oh
Page 321 and 322:
Squire, Disciplinary Counsel v. 130
Page 323 and 324:
Stafford, Disciplinary Counsel v. 1
Page 325 and 326:
Stoll, Erie-Huron Grievance Commt.
Page 327 and 328:
Stuard, Becker, and Bailey, Discipl
Page 329 and 330:
Taylor, Disciplinary Counsel v. 120
Page 331 and 332:
Theisler, Mahoning Cty. Bar Assn. v
Page 333 and 334:
Thomas, Cleveland Metro. Bar Assn.
Page 335 and 336:
Case Summaries- 333 court entered a
Page 337 and 338:
Trainor, Cincinnati Bar Assn. v. 12
Page 339 and 340:
Troxell, Columbus Bar Assn. v. 129
Page 341 and 342:
Troy, Lake Cty. Bar Assn. v. 130 Oh
Page 343 and 344:
Case Summaries- 341 professionals i
Page 345 and 346:
Vivyan, Disciplinary Counsel v. 125
Page 347 and 348:
Case Summaries- 345 offenses, there
Page 349 and 350:
Walker, Disciplinary Counsel v. 119
Page 351 and 352:
Weisberg, Toledo Bar Assn. v. 124 O
Page 353 and 354:
Case Summaries- 351 Chandlers to di
Page 355 and 356:
Williams, Disciplinary Counsel v. 1
Page 357 and 358:
Williamson, Butler Cty. Bar Assn. v
Page 359 and 360:
Wineman, Disciplinary Counsel v. 12
Page 361 and 362:
Wittbrod, Akron Bar Assn. v. 130 Oh
Page 363 and 364:
Yeager, Disciplinary Counsel v. 123
Page 365 and 366:
Zaffiro, Cleveland Metro. Bar Assn.
Page 367 and 368:
Zigan, Disciplinary Counsel v. 118
Page 369 and 370:
Bennett (2/4/2010) (unlawfully stru
Page 371 and 372:
Clovis (5/5/2010) (as required by G
Page 373 and 374:
on inactive status and while under
Page 375 and 376:
suspension, and remanded to board t
Page 377 and 378:
violations for attempt to dismiss a
Page 379 and 380:
Wineman (5/6/2009) Wolanin (4/1/200
Page 381 and 382:
Willette (3/20/2008) DR 2-103(C) (r
Page 383 and 384:
Patterson (12/2/2009) Ryan (8/27/20
Page 385 and 386:
DR 7-102(A)(5) (knowingly making fa
Page 387 and 388:
DR 9-102(B)(4) (failure to promptly
Page 389 and 390:
Dearfield (10/19/2011) DeLoach (8/3
Page 391 and 392:
McNerney (5/28/2009)(term suspensio
Page 393 and 394:
Hoppel (6/8/2011) Hunter (11/15/201
Page 395 and 396:
Rule 1.5(a) (charging or collecting
Page 397 and 398:
Gottehrer (3/17/2010) Gresley (12/2
Page 399 and 400:
Marshall (2/12/2009) Martin (12/15/
Page 401 and 402:
Meade (12/22/2010) Medley (1/27/201
show all

disciplinary handbook: volume v - Supreme Court - State of Ohio

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?