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

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Palombaro, Mahoning Cty. Bar Assn. v.121 Ohio St.3d 351, 2009-Ohio-1223. Decided 3/24/2009.Case Summaries- 242Respondent aided non-lawyers in the unauthorized practice of law through a foreclosure assistancecompany, failed to provide disclosures of his lack of malpractice insurance to his clients, and failedto properly preserve and account for client funds. Respondent came to represent Bradwin and DeniseJordan in 2005 through United Foreclosure Managers, L.L.C. (UFM), a company claiming to offerlegitimate assistance to debtors facing foreclosure by negotiating with their creditors. No one at UFM islicensed to practice law in Ohio. UFM solicited the Jordans on the same day the couple received noticeof their mortgagee‘s action in foreclosure. UFM arranged a meeting with the Jordans where Mrs. Jordansigned the necessary paperwork and paid half of the $990 fee, with the second half paid the followingmonth. UFM hired respondent to defend the Jordans by filing an answer or taking other legal action toavoid the entry of a default judgment. UFM dictated the scope of respondent‘s duties, which were limitedto filing a Leave to Plead and Answer, and paid him $55.00 for those services. Respondent timely filedthe Leave to Plead and Answer, but did so without speaking to the Jordans. He remained as the counselof record throughout the action, but never provided any verbal or written communication to the Jordansabout his limited involvement or the status of their case. The bank moved for summary judgment,which was granted because there was no pleading in opposition filed. The court ordered the Jordans‘home to be sold at auction. Respondent did not inform the Jordans of the summary judgment motion orjudgment entry or that an order of sale was issued. While the Jordans were able to repurchase theirhome prior to eviction, they did so to their financial detriment. Respondent believed that UFMcommunicated to the Jordans that his participation was limited filing two pleadings; that UFM wouldcommunicate with the mortgage company to resolve the dispute and avoid foreclosure; that UFMprovide necessary communications to the Jordans. Respondent settled a civil suit with the Jordans andpaid full restitution. Further, respondent did not have any malpractice insurance in effect to providecoverage for this incident, and did not provide notification to the Jordans that he was uninsured formalpractice. As to the Jordans, the board found violations of DR 1-104(A) and 3-101(A). Respondentdefended Michael Candle in a criminal indictment for felony theft and forgery beginning in 2004 andending with his guilty pleas in June 2007. Candle accepted $19,000 for the sale of two cars, but neverdelivered the cars. In November 2005, Candle claimed he transferred $19,000 to respondent to be held intrust in anticipation of paying restitution to his victims. Respondent maintained that the funds were inpayment of legal fees for a number of cases he had handled for Candle over the preceding years.However, respondent cannot produce detailed billing records for either himself or his office staff as tothese fees. The judgement entry incorporated the negotiated plea and provided that at Candle was topay the victims of his crime the $19,000 at his sentencing hearing or be sentenced for felony crimesinstead of misdemeanors. Respondent agreed to provide the money so Candle could make restitution,but maintains these funds were for past services, thus retaining the right to legally pursue Candle forthe past fees. The $19,000 was never dispersed from the trust account to respondent‘s operating account,yet the trust account records for November 2005 show a number of charges for insufficient funds andreflect improper payments. Respondent has made restitution to Candle, who is satisfied and wishes hisgrievance be dismissed or that respondent not be punished with an actual suspension. The board foundviolations of DR 9-102(A), 9-102(B)(3), and 9-102(B)(4). Lastly, he admitted that from November 1,2005 and continuing through December 31, 2007, he failed as a general matter to properly preserveand safeguard client funds. He regularly wrote checks from the trust account to pay business expensesand overdrew the account. The board found violations of DR 9-102(A), 9-102(B)(3), and 9-102(B)(4),and Prof.Cond.R. 1.15(a), (b), and (c). In aggravation, he engaged in a pattern of misconduct andcommitted multiple offenses. BCGD Proc.Reg. 10(B)(1)(c) and (d). In mitigation, he has no priordisciplinary record, cooperated in the disciplinary proceeding, and established his good character andreputation. BCGD Proc.Reg. 10(B)(2)(a), (d), and (e). Further he has already made restitution to theJordans and Candles and a third grievant whose grievance did not rise to the level of professionalmisconduct and his devotion to charitable and pro bono work weighs in his favor. BCGD Proc.Reg.10(B)(2)(c). Consistent with the stipulations, the board recommended a one-year suspension stayed on
Case Summaries- 243conditions that of a two year monitored probation in which his bank accounts be monitored by anotherattorney at his expense with quarterly reports to relator and the Supreme Court, full restitution be madeto Candle, Westfield Insurance, and the Jordans attendance at a law office management CLE, andpayment of all costs of this action. The Supreme Court agreed with the findings and recommendedsanction and so ordered.Rules Violated: Prof.Cond.R. 1.15(a), 1.15(b), 1.15(c); DR 1-104(A), 3-101(A), 9-102(A), 9-102(B)(3), 9-102(B)(4)Aggravation: (c), (d)Mitigation: (a), (c), (d), (e)Prior Discipline: NO Procedure/ Process Issues: NO Criminal Conduct: NOPublic Official: NO Sanction: One-year suspension, stayed
Page 1:
The Supreme Court of OhioBoard of C
Page 5 and 6:
Drain, Cuyahoga Cty. Bar Assn. v.12
Page 7 and 8:
Horton, Disciplinary Counsel v.124
Page 9 and 10:
Markovich, Akron Bar Assn. v.117 Oh
Page 11 and 12:
Table of Cases- 9Ramos, Cleveland B
Page 13 and 14:
Table of Cases- 11Stuard, Becker, B
Page 15 and 16:
Case SummariesAllerding, Columbus B
Page 17 and 18:
Case Summaries- 15Archer, Northwest
Page 19 and 20:
Case Summaries- 17intermittently ov
Page 21 and 22:
Bartels, Allen Cty. Bar Assn. v.124
Page 23 and 24:
Blair, Disciplinary Counsel v.128 O
Page 25 and 26:
Case Summaries- 23Bowling, Discipli
Page 27 and 28:
Broschak, Disciplinary Counsel v.11
Page 29 and 30:
Brown, Dayton Bar Assn. v.124 Ohio
Page 31 and 32:
Brown, Allen Cty. Bar Assn. v.124 O
Page 33 and 34:
Brueggeman, Disciplinary Counsel v.
Page 35 and 36:
Bunstine, Disciplinary Counsel v.12
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.12
Page 43 and 44:
Cantrell, Disciplinary Counsel v.12
Page 45 and 46:
Cantrell, Disciplinary Counsel v.13
Page 47 and 48:
Case Summaries- 45abuse impede his
Page 49 and 50:
Case Summaries- 47respondent‘s de
Page 51 and 52:
Case Summaries- 49with a client if
Page 53 and 54:
Case Summaries- 51not DR 1-102(A)(5
Page 55 and 56:
Clovis, Columbus Bar Assn. v.125 Oh
Page 57 and 58:
Corrigan, Geauga Cty. Bar Assn. v.1
Page 59 and 60:
Cunningham, Butler Cty. Bar Assn. v
Page 61 and 62:
Davis, Disciplinary Counsel v.121 O
Page 63 and 64:
Dawson, Cleveland Metropolitan Bar
Page 65 and 66:
DeLoach, Akron Bar Assn. v.130 Ohio
Page 67 and 68:
Detweiler, Disciplinary Counsel v.1
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.12
Page 75 and 76:
Drain, Cuyahoga Cty. Bar Assn. v.12
Page 77 and 78:
Ellis, Columbus Bar Assn. v.120 Ohi
Page 79 and 80:
Emerson, Cincinnati Bar Assn. v.122
Page 81 and 82:
Farah, Toledo Bar Assn. v.125 Ohio
Page 83 and 84:
Farrell, Cincinnati Bar Assn. v.129
Page 85 and 86:
Fink, Akron Bar Assn. v.131 Ohio St
Page 87 and 88:
Folwell, Disciplinary Counsel v.129
Page 89 and 90:
Freedman, Akron Bar Assn. v.128 Ohi
Page 91 and 92:
Freeman, Disciplinary Counsel v.126
Page 93 and 94:
Freeman, Disciplinary Counsel v.119
Page 95 and 96:
Frost, Disciplinary Counsel v.122 O
Page 97 and 98:
Case Summaries- 95his goal of gaini
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.1
Page 105 and 106:
Gottehrer, Cleveland Metro. Bar Ass
Page 107 and 108:
Case Summaries- 105disgorgement of
Page 109 and 110:
Grote, Cincinnati Bar Assn. v.127 O
Page 111 and 112:
Hackett, Cincinnati Bar Assn. v.129
Page 113 and 114:
Case Summaries- 111presented eviden
Page 115 and 116:
Hanni, Mahoning Cty. Bar Assn. v.12
Page 117 and 118:
Hauck, Cincinnati Bar Assn. v.129 O
Page 119 and 120:
Heiland, Disciplinary Counsel v.116
Page 121 and 122:
Heisler, Cincinnati Bar Assn. v.119
Page 123 and 124:
Henry, Disciplinary Counsel v.127 O
Page 125 and 126:
Hickman, Toledo Bar Assn. v.119 Ohi
Page 127 and 128:
Hildebrand, Cleveland Metro. Bar As
Page 129 and 130:
Holda, Akron Bar Assn. v.125 Ohio S
Page 131 and 132:
Horan, Disciplinary Counsel v.123 O
Page 133 and 134:
Hoskins, Disciplinary Counsel v.119
Page 135 and 136:
Howard, Disciplinary Counsel v.123
Page 137 and 138:
Hunter, Columbus Bar Assn. v.130 Oh
Page 139 and 140:
Jackel, Ohio State Bar Assn. v.118
Page 141 and 142:
Jackson, Disciplinary Counsel v.127
Page 143 and 144:
Jaffe, Cleveland Metro Bar Assn. v.
Page 145 and 146:
Johnson, Toledo Bar Assn. v.121 Ohi
Page 147 and 148:
Johnson, Cuyahoga Cty. Bar Assn. v.
Page 149 and 150:
Johnston, Disciplinary Counsel v.12
Page 151 and 152:
Jones, Mahoning Cty. Bar Assn. v.12
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- 159other assets in
Page 163 and 164:
Case Summaries- 161none of the mone
Page 165 and 166:
Case Summaries- 163Although the uns
Page 167 and 168:
Kubyn, Lake Cty. Bar Assn. v.121 Oh
Page 169 and 170:
Landis, Disciplinary Counsel v.124
Page 171 and 172:
Lapine, Disciplinary Counsel v.128
Page 173 and 174:
Larkin, Columbus Bar Assn. v.128 Oh
Page 175 and 176:
Case Summaries- 173Board‘s findin
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- 183and blame the wo
Page 187 and 188:
Longino, Disciplinary Counsel v.128
Page 189 and 190:
Lowden, Toledo Bar Assn. v.117 Ohio
Page 191 and 192:
Case Summaries- 1898.4(h) by his ac
Page 193 and 194: Mamich, Disciplinary Counsel v.125
Page 195 and 196: Manning, Disciplinary Counsel v.119
Page 197 and 198: Marosan, Stark Cty. Bar Assn. v.119
Page 199 and 200: Martin, Toledo Bar Assn. v.131 Ohio
Page 201 and 202: Mason, Toledo Bar Assn. v.118 Ohio
Page 203 and 204: McAuliffe, Disciplinary Counsel v.1
Page 205 and 206: McCord, Disciplinary Counsel v.121
Page 207 and 208: McFaul, Cleveland Metro. Bar Assn.
Page 209 and 210: Case Summaries- 207withdrawal. Resp
Page 211 and 212: Case Summaries- 209that he is compe
Page 213 and 214: Meade, Disciplinary Counsel v.127 O
Page 215 and 216: Miller, Disciplinary Counsel v.126
Page 217 and 218: Minamyer, Butler Cty. Bar Assn. v.1
Page 219 and 220: Case Summaries- 217represent his cl
Page 221 and 222: Case Summaries- 219became effective
Page 223 and 224: Mitchell, Disciplinary Counsel v.12
Page 225 and 226: Mullaney, Brooking, and Moeves, Cin
Page 227 and 228: Murraine, Disciplinary Counsel v.13
Page 229 and 230: Nance, Cleveland Metropolitan Bar A
Page 231 and 232: Newcomer, Disciplinary Counsel v.11
Page 233 and 234: Newman, Cincinnati Bar Assn. v.124
Page 235 and 236: Niermeyer, Disciplinary Counsel v.1
Page 237 and 238: Nittskoff, Disciplinary Counsel. v.
Page 239 and 240: Case Summaries- 237Master Commissio
Page 241 and 242: Ohlin, Disciplinary Counsel v.126 O
Page 243: O’Malley, Disciplinary Counsel v.
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- 249met 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.12
Page 259 and 260: Potter, Disciplinary Counsel v.126
Page 261 and 262: Pullins, Disciplinary Counsel v.127
Page 263 and 264: Case Summaries- 261disqualification
Page 265 and 266: Randall, Dayton Bar Assn. v.118 Ohi
Page 267 and 268: Case Summaries- 265history, no dish
Page 269 and 270: Raso, Disciplinary Counsel v.129 Oh
Page 271 and 272: Resnick, Ohio State Bar Assn. v.128
Page 273 and 274: Ricketts, Disciplinary Counsel v.12
Page 275 and 276: Ridenbaugh, Disciplinary Counsel v.
Page 277 and 278: Ritson, Toledo Bar Assn. v.127 Ohio
Page 279 and 280: Roberts, Disciplinary Counsel v.117
Page 281 and 282: Robinson, Disciplinary Counsel v.12
Page 283 and 284: Rohrer, Disciplinary Counsel v.124
Page 285 and 286: Rozanc, Lake Cty. Bar Assn. v.123 O
Page 287 and 288: Rust, Toledo Bar Assn. v.124 Ohio S
Page 289 and 290: Sabol, Disciplinary Counsel v.118 O
Page 291 and 292: Case Summaries- 289condition of the
Page 293 and 294: Sanz, Cincinnati Bar Assn. v.128 Oh
Page 295 and 296:
Saunders, Greene Cty. Bar Assn. v.1
Page 297 and 298:
Sayler, Cleveland Metro. Bar Assn.
Page 299 and 300:
Case Summaries- 2971.5(a), 1.16(d),
Page 301 and 302:
Schram, Dayton Bar Assn. v.122 Ohio
Page 303 and 304:
Scott, Toledo Bar Assn. v.129 Ohio
Page 305 and 306:
Shaw, Disciplinary Counsel v.126 Oh
Page 307 and 308:
Shea, Columbus Bar Assn. v.117 Ohio
Page 309 and 310:
Shuler, Disciplinary Counsel v.129
Page 311 and 312:
Siewert, Disciplinary Counsel. v.13
Page 313 and 314:
Simon, Disciplinary Counsel v.128 O
Page 315 and 316:
Smith, Disciplinary Counsel v.124 O
Page 317 and 318:
Smith, Disciplinary Counsel v.128 O
Page 319 and 320:
Smithern, Akron Bar Assn. v.125 Ohi
Page 321 and 322:
Squire, Disciplinary Counsel v.130
Page 323 and 324:
Stafford, Disciplinary Counsel v.12
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- 333court entered an
Page 337 and 338:
Trainor, Cincinnati Bar Assn. v.129
Page 339 and 340:
Troxell, Columbus Bar Assn. v.129 O
Page 341 and 342:
Troy, Lake Cty. Bar Assn. v.130 Ohi
Page 343 and 344:
Case Summaries- 341professionals in
Page 345 and 346:
Vivyan, Disciplinary Counsel v.125
Page 347 and 348:
Case Summaries- 345offenses, there
Page 349 and 350:
Walker, Disciplinary Counsel v.119
Page 351 and 352:
Weisberg, Toledo Bar Assn. v.124 Oh
Page 353 and 354:
Case Summaries- 351Chandlers to dis
Page 355 and 356:
Williams, Disciplinary Counsel v.13
Page 357 and 358:
Williamson, Butler Cty. Bar Assn. v
Page 359 and 360:
Wineman, Disciplinary Counsel v.121
Page 361 and 362:
Wittbrod, Akron Bar Assn. v.130 Ohi
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 O
Page 369 and 370:
Bennett (2/4/2010) (unlawfullystruc
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 (4/1/2009
Page 381 and 382:
Willette (3/20/2008)DR 2-103(C) (re
Page 383 and 384:
Patterson (12/2/2009)Ryan (8/27/200
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 (8/31
Page 391 and 392:
McNerney (5/28/2009)(term suspensio
Page 393 and 394:
Hoppel (6/8/2011)Hunter (11/15/2011
Page 395 and 396:
Rule 1.5(a) (charging or collecting
Page 397 and 398:
Gottehrer (3/17/2010)Gresley (12/22
Page 399 and 400:
Marshall (2/12/2009)Martin (12/15/2
Page 401 and 402:
Meade (12/22/2010)Medley (1/27/2011
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?