Columbus Bar Association v. King - 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 Columbus Bar Association v. King, 95 Ohio St.3d 93, 2002-Ohio-1945.]

COLUMBUS BAR ASSOCIATION v. KING.
[Cite as Columbus Bar Assn. v. King (2002), 95 Ohio St.3d 93.]
Attorneys at law -- Misconduct -- One-year suspension with credit for time
served -- Failing to fulfill purpose of mentorship imposed at previous
disciplinary proceeding -- Engaging in conduct indicating inability to
function as a professional lawyer in a courtroom or afford clients
adequate representation -- Failure to pay costs imposed at previous
disciplinary proceeding.
(No. 98-423 -- Submitted January 8, 2002 -- Decided April 24, 2002.)
ON CERTIFIED REPORT by the Board of Commissioners on Grievances and
Discipline of the Supreme Court, No. 96-115.
__________________

Per Curiam. In December 1998, for conduct in January 1996, we
suspended Christopher King, now of Dallas, Texas, Attorney Registration No.
0062199, from the practice of law in Ohio for one year, but stayed the suspension
on the condition that during that year he be placed on probation and work with a
mentor appointed by the relator, Columbus Bar Association. Columbus Bar Assn.
v. King (1998), 84 Ohio St.3d 174, 702 N.E.2d 862. We also imposed costs of
that proceeding on respondent.

On February 19, 1999, relator appointed Guy L. Reese II, a former
Franklin County Municipal Court Judge and a former Franklin County Common
Pleas Court Judge, to be respondent's mentor. Based upon the mentor's report to
the relator and respondent's failure to make the payment ordered in our December
1998 order, relator requested on September 13, 2000, that respondent's probation
be revoked, that his stayed suspension be reinstated, and that respondent be held
in contempt. Respondent opposed this request, and the matter was heard by a

SUPREME COURT OF OHIO
panel of the Board of Commissioners on Grievances and Discipline of the
Supreme Court.

At a hearing on June 6, 2001, the panel considered testimony, exhibits,
and stipulations. It received evidence that on January 9, 1998, Judge David Cain
of the Franklin County Court of Common Pleas imposed a Civ.R. 11 sanction on
respondent in the amount of $5,000 to be paid in thirty days for frivolous
behavior in continuing to pursue an action despite his client's own
acknowledgement that she had no claim. Respondent did not appeal the order or
pay the sanction. Instead, he wrote a letter to the judge and filed suit against him.
The panel received evidence that on September 9, 1998, Judge Edmund A.
Sargus, Jr., of the United States District Court for the Southern District of Ohio
fined respondent $1,500 in attorney fees and $1,311.73 in costs for his conduct in
Lampley v. Vagnier (1998), No. C2-96-337. Respondent did not appeal this
sanction or two others in the same case that totaled $5,139, nor did he pay them,
except for possibly $300 of the attorney fees. On February 28, 2000, Judge
Sargus ordered respondent to appear and show cause why he should not be held
in contempt for failure to pay the sanctions.

The panel also received evidence that on February 11, 1999, Judge
Algenon L. Marbley of the United States District Court for the Southern District
of Ohio held respondent in contempt for the manner in which he comported
himself in Belcher v. Ohio Dept. Human Serv., (S.D.Ohio 1999), 48 F.Supp.3d
729, and ordered him to complete a six-week preceptorship with Professor
Shirley Mays of the Capital University Law School. Respondent did not at any
time comply with the requirements of the preceptorship.

The panel received further evidence that on July 7, 1999, Visiting Judge
John Martin of the Franklin County Common Pleas Court held respondent in
contempt and granted a mistrial due to respondent's conduct in Smith v.
Professional Cellular Serv., Inc., No. 95CVH-12-8949, and ordered him to pay
2

January Term, 2002
attorney fees and court costs. Respondent instead filed a complaint against Judge
Martin.

In addition, the panel received evidence that respondent informed his
monitor, Judge Reese, that additional sanctions had been imposed against him of
$1,852.50 by Judge David Cain in Oglesby v. Columbus, Franklin C.P. No. 97-
CVC-03-3823, of $2,077.59 by Judge Nodine Miller of the Franklin County
Common Pleas Court in Hamm v. Gahanna City Council, No. 95CVF085484, of
$200 by Judge Cain in Michael v. Whitehall, No. 97CVC012333, and of $1,000
by Judge James L. Graham of the United States District Court for the Southern
District of Ohio in Archer v. Roman, No. C-2-95-1187.

On the basis of this evidence the panel found that respondent had not
fulfilled the purpose of his mentorship and that his conduct indicated that he
could neither function as a professional lawyer in a courtroom nor afford his
clients adequate representation.

In addition, the panel further found that respondent had not paid the costs
imposed in our December 1998 order. The panel recommended that respondent's
probation be terminated and that his suspension from the practice of law be
reinstated.

We have reviewed the record and adopt the findings of the panel. It is
clear from the numerous sanctions that respondent received during his term of
probation for his conduct in several courts, sanctions that remain unpaid, that the
mentor's report is credible. Further, in three years respondent has not paid the
costs we imposed in December 1998, costs that we ordered paid within ninety
days.

We have already revoked respondent's probation and reinstated his
suspension on October 4, 2001, "pending entry of a final order by this court." 93
Ohio St.3d 1438, 755 N.E.2d 901. Respondent is hereby suspended from the
practice of law for one year with credit for time served. Respondent is further
3

SUPREME COURT OF OHIO
ordered to pay the costs of the original proceeding in the amount of $1,363.71
plus interest of ten percent from March 8, 1999 until paid. Respondent shall
further pay the costs of these proceedings.
Judgment accordingly.

MOYER, C.J., DOUGLAS, RESNICK, F.E. SWEENEY, PFEIFER, COOK and
LUNDBERG STRATTON, JJ., concur.
__________________

Julia A. Davis, Bradley N. Frick and Anthony M. Roseboro, for relator.

Christopher King, pro se.
__________________
4