Allen Cty. Bar Assn. v. Williams - 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

[Cite as Allen Cty. Bar Assn. v. Williams, 92 Ohio St.3d 104, 2001-Ohio-160.]

ALLEN COUNTY BAR ASSOCIATION v. WILLIAMS.
[Cite as Allen Cty. Bar Assn. v. Williams (2001), 92 Ohio St.3d 104.]
Attorneys at law -- Misconduct -- Six-month suspension with entire six months
stayed with one-year probation -- Dismissal of appeal in criminal case
without clients' consent.
(No. 00-2251 -- Submitted February 7, 2001 -- Decided June 13, 2001.)
ON CERTIFIED REPORT by the Board of Commissioners on Grievances and
Discipline of the Supreme Court, No. 99-71.
__________________

Per Curiam. On December 18, 1996, James and Richard Hardin were
convicted by the Court of Common Pleas of Hardin County of receiving stolen
property, a felony. In addition, James Hardin was found guilty of felony theft.
Sentencing took place in February 1997. On March 6, 1997, respondent, Jeffrey
G. Williams of Lima, Ohio, Attorney Registration No. 0010085, filed a notice of
appeal on their behalf. On the day the appellate brief was due, respondent
dismissed their appeal, and the judgments became final.

On October 15, 1999, relator, Allen County Bar Association, filed a
complaint alleging that the Hardins did not give consent to the dismissals and that
therefore respondent violated several Disciplinary Rules. Respondent answered,
and the matter was submitted to a panel of the Board of Commissioners on
Grievances and Discipline ("board").

Based on stipulations and evidence received at a hearing on September 1,
2000, the panel found that respondent, who had represented the Hardins at their
criminal trial, agreed to represent them on appeal. The panel found that
respondent dismissed the appeal because after examining the transcript, he
believed that there was no error except one possibly related to venue. Respondent

SUPREME COURT OF OHIO
did not raise the venue issue on appeal because he believed that the judge in
Auglaize County, where venue might have been proper, would sentence the
Hardins to prison, whereas the Hardins' present sentence was probation.
Respondent admitted that in seventeen years of practicing law, he had not taken
any criminal appeals although he had substantial experience with criminal cases.
He also admitted that he was unaware that under Ohio law, by using what is
known as an "Anders brief," he could have submitted a request to the appellate
court that it inspect the trial record for any appellate issues.

The respondent claimed that he had advised the Hardins that he would
dismiss the case if he found that there was no error to support the appeal and that
the Hardins consented. However, the Hardins claimed that respondent dismissed
the appeal without their permission. The panel found that although respondent
may have made some effort to advise the Hardins that the appeal would be
dismissed, that effort was inadequate and ineffective.

The panel concluded that respondent's conduct violated DR 6-101(A)(2)
(handling a legal matter without preparation adequate in the circumstances), 7-
101(A)(1) (failing to seek the lawful objectives of the client by reasonable
means), and 7-101(A)(2) (failing to carry out a contract for professional services).

The panel noted in mitigation that respondent cooperated with the relator
and regretted his actions. It also found that the Hardins did not pay respondent in
full for his trial work and that the $1,000 the Hardins paid respondent to pursue
their appeal covered costs of transcripts and filing fees but no appellate attorney
fees. In addition, the panel noted that respondent had previously received a public
reprimand from this court. Disciplinary Counsel v. Williams (1990), 51 Ohio
St.3d 36, 553 N.E.2d 1082.

The panel recommended that respondent be suspended from the practice
of law for six months with the entire six months stayed. Respondent would be
placed on probation for one year, during which time he would complete six hours
2

January Term, 2001
of continuing legal education regarding client communication, office
management, and billing, and during probation, he would cooperate fully with a
mentor appointed by relator to ensure that respondent uses adequate procedures to
communicate with his clients and keeps them well informed about their cases.
The board adopted the findings, conclusions, and recommendation of the panel.

After review of the record, we adopt the findings, conclusions, and
recommendation of the board. Respondent is hereby suspended from the practice
of law for six months with the entire six months stayed. Further, respondent is
hereby placed on probation for one year during which time he shall complete six
hours of continuing legal education regarding client communication, office
management, and billing. During his probation he shall also cooperate fully with
a monitoring attorney appointed by relator to ensure that he uses adequate
procedures to communicate with his clients and keeps them well informed about
their cases. Failure to meet the terms of this probation will result in the
imposition of the actual suspension. Costs are taxed to respondent.
Judgment accordingly.

DOUGLAS, RESNICK, F.E. SWEENEY, PFEIFER, COOK and LUNDBERG
STRATTON, JJ., concur.

MOYER, C.J., dissents.
__________________

MOYER, C.J., dissenting. I would suspend respondent for six months and
not stay the suspension.
__________________

Jerry O. Pitts and John C. Keenehan, for relator.

Richard T. Reese, for respondent.
__________________
3