Cincinnati Bar Assn. v. Shabazz - Ohio Supreme Court Opinion - Ohio Supreme Court Decision

	ROMINGER LEGAL
		Ohio Court Cases and Opinions - Ohio Legal Research
					Need Legal Help?
					Need Legal Help?
LEGAL RESEARCH CENTER
LEGAL RESEARCH CENTER			LEGAL HEADLINES - CASE LAW - LEGAL FORMS	NOT FINDING WHAT YOU NEED? -RESEARCH

This court case was taken from the web sites of the Ohio Courts. Search our site for more cases - CLICK HERE

LEGAL RESEARCH

COURT REPORTERS

PRIVATE INVESTIGATORS

PROCESS SERVERS

DOCUMENT RETRIEVERS

EXPERT WITNESSES

Find a Private Investigator

Find an Expert Witness

Find a Process Server

Case Law - save on Lexis / WestLaw.

Legal News - Legal Headlines

OPINIONS OF THE SUPREME COURT OF OHIO
The full texts of the opinions of the Supreme Court of
Ohio are being transmitted electronically beginning May 27,
1992, pursuant to a pilot project implemented by Chief Justice
Thomas J. Moyer.
Please call any errors to the attention of the Reporter's
Office of the Supreme Court of Ohio. Attention: Walter S.
Kobalka, Reporter, or Deborah J. Barrett, Administrative
Assistant. Tel.: (614) 466-4961; in Ohio 1-800-826-9010.
Your comments on this pilot project are also welcome.
NOTE: Corrections may be made by the Supreme Court to the
full texts of the opinions after they have been released
electronically to the public. The reader is therefore advised
to check the bound volumes of Ohio St.3d published by West
Publishing Company for the final versions of these opinions.
The advance sheets to Ohio St.3d will also contain the volume
and page numbers where the opinions will be found in the bound
volumes of the Ohio Official Reports.

Cincinnati Bar Association v. Shabazz.
[Cite as Cincinnati Bar Assn. v. Shabazz (1994), Ohio
St.3d .]
Attorneys at law -- Misconduct -- Six-month suspension to be
served consecutively to prior suspension with one year of
monitored probation to follow -- Failure to pay client's
subrogated medical bills after retaining an amount from
settlement to pay them.
(No. 94-553 -- Submitted May 10, 1994 -- Decided July 13,
1994.)
On Certified Report by the Board of Commissioners on
Grievances and Discipline of the Supreme Court, No. 93-27.
On February 24, 1993, this court suspended respondent,
Donald A. Shabazz of Cincinnati, Ohio, Attorney Registration
No. 0024227, for two years for multiple violations of the Code
of Professional Responsibility. Cincinnati Bar Assn. v.
Shabazz (1993), 66 Ohio St.3d 4, 607 N.E.2d 438. Following the
first year of the suspension, the remainder of the suspension
was to be stayed and respondent would be placed on monitored
probation for the balance of the sanction.
In a complaint filed June 21, 1993, relator, Cincinnati
Bar Association, charged respondent with one count of
misconduct, alleging that he had violated DR 1-102(A)(4)
(conduct involving dishonesty, fraud, deceit, or
misrepresentation), 6-101(A)(3) (neglecting a legal matter
entrusted to him), 7-101(A)(1) (failing to seek the lawful
objectives of his client), 7-101(A)(2) (failing to carry out a
contract of employment for professional services), 7-101(A)(3)
(causing prejudice or damage to one's client during the course
of the professional relationship), and 9-102(B)(3) (failing to
maintain complete records of all funds of a client coming into
possession of the lawyer and render appropriate accounts to his
client regarding them).
An evidentiary hearing on the matter was held before a
panel of the Board of Commissioners on Grievances and
Discipline of the Supreme Court ("board") on February 11,
1994. The stipulations, testimony, and documentary evidence
indicated that in 1989, Natalie Young retained respondent to

represent her in an automobile accident case. As a result of
the accident, Young incurred medical bills totalling $563.80.
On July 23, 1991, through respondent's efforts, Young's
personal injury claim was settled for $5,150. At the time of
the foregoing settlement, respondent received his one-third
contingency fee of $1,716 and retained an additional $563 to
pay the subrogated medical bills, remitting the balance of the
settlement to Young.
When respondent failed to pay the medical bills, Health
Care Recoveries, Inc. sent him a statement dated July 8, 1992
concerning the unpaid balance. Respondent could not recall
receiving this statement. In January and February 1993, Young
received collection letters concerning the unpaid medical
bills. Young contacted respondent's office several times by
telephone but respondent never returned her calls. Respondent
claimed that he never received any messages from Young about
the medical bills. Young filed a grievance with relator on
March 10, 1993. On April 15, 1993, relator advised respondent
that Young's complaint had been filed against him. On April
19, 1993, respondent sent a cashier's check in the amount of
$563.80 to Health Care Recoveries, Inc.
In mitigation, respondent claimed that during the time of
the settlement, he was under a great deal of stress as a result
of his prior disciplinary proceeding and difficulties with his
former law partner. Respondent further testified that he had
experienced a large turnover of secretarial staff and that he
was unaware that Young's medical bills had not been paid until
being contacted by relator in April 1993, at which time he
promptly remitted the full amount. Relator recommended that
respondent be indefinitely suspended, and respondent requested
a public reprimand.
The panel concluded that respondent had violated DR
6-101(A)(3) and 9-102(B)(3), and recommended the imposition of
an additional six-month suspension to be served consecutively
to respondent's prior sentence, with the existing one-year
monitored probation to follow. The board adopted the findings
of fact, conclusions of law, and recommendation of the panel,
and further recommended that costs be taxed to respondent.

Klaine, Wiley, Hoffmann & Meurer and Franklin A. Klaine,
Jr.; Lindhorst & Driedame and James L. O'Connell, for relator.
Donald A. Shabazz, pro se.

Per Curiam. We concur in the findings and recommendation
of the board. Donald A. Shabazz is hereby suspended from the
practice of law for an additional six months, to be served
consecutively to his prior suspension, with the one year of
monitored probation to follow. Costs taxed to respondent.
Judgment accordingly.
Moyer, C.J., A.W. Sweeney, Douglas, Wright, Resnick, F.E.
Sweeney and Pfeifer, JJ., concur.