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

Murraine, Disciplinary Counsel v.
130 Ohio St.3d 397, 2011-Ohio-5795. Decided 11/17/2011.
Case Summaries- 225
Respondent used his client trust account as his personal account. Respondent received a CLE suspension
in 2009 and is currently listed as inactive. The parties entered into a consent to discipline agreement
for a one-year, stayed suspension, which was accepted by the panel and the board. After filing for
bankruptcy, respondent stopped using his personal account and started using his trust account as his
personal account; he deposited his own funds into the account and wrote personal checks from it. There
is no evidence that he used client money to pay for his own expenses, nor that he used it to defraud his
creditors. This conduct violated Prof.Cond.R. 1.15(a) (prohibiting comingling of funds), 1.15(b)
(allowing a lawyer to put funds into a trust account only to avoid fees or charges), and 8.4(h) (adversely
reflect on fitness to practice law).The Court agreed with these findings. There were no factors in
aggravation. In mitigation, respondent lacked a prior disciplinary record, cooperated with the disciplinary
process, and presented evidence of good character. BCGD Proc.Reg. 10(B)(2)(a), (e). Additionally,
none of respondent‘s clients were harmed by this misconduct. He has closed his trust account,
relocated to Texas, and is no longer practicing law. Citing Johnson (2009), the Court accepted the
consent-to-discipline agreement and ordered a one-year suspension, stayed.
Rules Violated: Prof.Cond.R. 1.15(a), 1.15(b), 8.4(h)
Aggravation: NONE
Mitigation: (a), (e)
Prior Discipline: NO Procedure/ Process Issues: NO Criminal Conduct: NO
Public Official: NO Sanction: One-year suspension, stayed