04/21/2005 Case Announcements - 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

CASE ANNOUNCEMENTS AND ADMINISTRATIVE ACTIONS

April 21, 2005

[Cite as 04/21/2005 Case Announcements, 2005-Ohio-1834.]

DISCIPLINARY CASES

2005-0568. In re White.
On March 29, 2005, and pursuant to Gov.Bar R. V(5)(A)(3), the Secretary of the
Board of Commissioners on Grievances and Discipline of the Supreme Court of
Ohio certified to the Supreme Court a certified copy of a judgment entry of a
felony conviction against David Lee White II, an attorney licensed to practice law
in the state of Ohio.

Upon consideration thereof and pursuant to Gov.Bar R. V(5)(A)(4), it is
ordered and decreed that David Lee White II, Attorney Registration No. 0030927,
last known business address in McConnelsville, Ohio, be, and hereby is, suspended
from the practice of law for an interim period, effective as of the date of this entry.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that this matter be, and is hereby, referred to
the Disciplinary Counsel for investigation and commencement of disciplinary
proceedings.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that respondent immediately cease and desist
from the practice of law in any form and is hereby forbidden to appear on behalf of
another before any court, judge, commission, board, administrative agency or other
public authority.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that, effective immediately, respondent be
forbidden to counsel or advise, or prepare legal instruments for others or in any
manner perform legal services for others.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that respondent is hereby divested of each, any
and all of the rights, privileges and prerogatives customarily accorded to a member
in good standing of the legal profession of Ohio.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that, pursuant to Gov.Bar R. X(3)(G),
respondent shall complete one credit hour of continuing legal education for each
month or portion of a month of the suspension. As part of the total credit hours of

continuing legal education required by Gov.Bar R. X(3)(G), respondent shall
complete one credit hour of instruction related to professional conduct required by
Gov.Bar R. X(3)(A)(1) for each six months, or portion of six months, of the
suspension.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that respondent shall not be reinstated to the
practice of law in Ohio until (1) respondent complies with the requirements for
reinstatement set forth in the Supreme Court Rules for the Government of the Bar
of Ohio; (2) respondent complies with this and all other orders issued by this court;
(3) respondent complies with the Supreme Court Rules for the Government of the
Bar of Ohio; and (4) this court orders respondent reinstated.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED, sua sponte, by the court that, within 90 days
of the date of this order, respondent shall reimburse any amounts that have been
awarded by the Clients' Security Fund pursuant to Gov.Bar R. VIII(7)(F). It is
further ordered, sua sponte, by the court that if, after the date of this order, the
Clients' Security Fund awards any amount against the respondent pursuant to
Gov.Bar R. VIII(7)(F), the respondent shall reimburse that amount to the Clients'
Security Fund within 90 days of the notice of such award.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that on or before 30 days from the date of this
order, respondent shall:
1. Notify all clients being represented in pending matters and any co-
counsel of respondent's suspension and consequent disqualification to act as
an attorney after the effective date of this order and, in the absence of co-
counsel, also notify the clients to seek legal service elsewhere, calling
attention to any urgency in seeking the substitution of another attorney in
respondent's place;
2. Regardless of any fees or expenses due respondent, deliver to all clients
being represented in pending matters any papers or other property pertaining
to the client, or notify the clients or co-counsel, if any, of a suitable time and
place where the papers or other property may be obtained, calling attention
to any urgency for obtaining such papers or other property;
3. Refund any part of any fees or expenses paid in advance that are
unearned or not paid, and account for any trust money or property in
respondent's possession or control;
4. Notify opposing counsel in pending litigation or, in the absence of
counsel, the adverse parties of respondent's disqualification to act as an
attorney after the effective date of this order, and file a notice of
disqualification of respondent with the court or agency before which the
litigation is pending for inclusion in the respective file or files;
5. Send all such notices required by this order by certified mail with a return
address where communications may thereafter be directed to respondent;
2
04-21-05

6. File with the Clerk of this court and the Disciplinary Counsel of the
Supreme Court an affidavit showing compliance with this order, showing
proof of service of notices required herein, and setting forth the address
where the affiant may receive communications; and
7. Retain and maintain a record of the various steps taken by respondent
pursuant to this order.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that respondent shall keep the Clerk and the
Disciplinary Counsel advised of any change of address where respondent may
receive communications.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED, sua sponte, that all documents filed with this
court in this case shall meet the filing requirements set forth in the Rules of
Practice of the Supreme Court of Ohio, including requirements as to form, number,
and timeliness of filings.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED, sua sponte, that service shall be deemed made
on respondent by sending this order, and all other orders in this case, by certified
mail to the most recent address respondent has given to the Attorney Registration
Section.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Clerk of this court issue certified
copies of this order as provided for in Gov.Bar R. V(8)(D)(1), that publication be
made as provided for in Gov.Bar R. V(8)(D)(2), and that respondent bear the costs
of publication.

MISCELLANEOUS DISMISSALS

2003-1207. Cincinnati Gas & Elec. Co. v. Pub. Util. Comm.
Public Utilities Commission, No. 03-1145-EL-GAG. This cause is pending before
the court as an appeal from the Public Utilities Commission of Ohio. Upon
consideration of the joint application for dismissal,
IT IS ORDERED by the court that the application for dismissal be, and
hereby is, granted.
ACCORDINGLY, IT IS FURTHER ORDERED by the court that this cause
be, and hereby is, dismissed.

2004-0563. Cincinnati Gas & Elec. Co. v. Pub. Util. Comm.
Public Utilities Commission, No. 01-2164-EL-ORD. This cause is pending before
the court as an appeal from the Public Utilities Commission of Ohio. Upon
consideration of the joint application for dismissal,
IT IS ORDERED by the court that the application for dismissal be, and
hereby is, granted.
3
04-21-05

ACCORDINGLY, IT IS FURTHER ORDERED by the court that this cause
be, and hereby is, dismissed.

MISCELLANEOUS ORDERS

In re Report of the Commission

on Continuing Legal Education.

E N T R Y
Joanne L. Barach

(#0059697),
Respondent.

This matter originated in this court on the filing of a report by the
Commission on Continuing Legal Education (the "commission") pursuant to
Gov.Bar R. X(6)(A)(1)(b) and (A)(2)(d). The commission recommended the
imposition of sanctions against certain attorneys, including the above-named
respondent, for failure to comply with the provisions of Gov.Bar R. X, Attorney
Continuing Legal Education, for the 2002-2003 reporting period.

On November 22, 2004, pursuant to Gov.Bar R. X(6)(B)(1), this court issued
to the respondent an order to show cause why the recommended sanction should
not be adopted by the court and an order so entered against the respondent.
Respondent filed no objections to the commission's recommendation and this cause
was considered by the court.

On April 8, 2005, this court entered an order adopting the commission's
recommendation imposing a fee sanction and suspending respondent.

It has now come to the court's attention that the respondent is deceased.
Accordingly,

IT IS ORDERED by the court, sua sponte, that the orders of November 22,
2004, and April 8, 2005, be, and the same are hereby, vacated.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that this matter be dismissed.

In re Report of the Commission

On Continuing Legal Education.

E N T R Y
Theodore A. Amata

(#0065658),

4
04-21-05

Respondent.

This matter originated in this court on the filing of a report by the
Commission on Continuing Legal Education ("commission") pursuant to Gov.Bar
R. X(6)(A)(1)(b) and (A)(2)(d). The commission recommended the imposition of
sanctions against certain attorneys, including the above-named respondent, for
failure to comply with the provisions of Gov.Bar R. X, Attorney Continuing Legal
Education, for the 2002-2003 reporting period.

On April 8, 2005, this court adopted the recommendation of the
commission, imposed a sanction fee upon the respondent, and suspended the
respondent from the practice of law pursuant to Gov.Bar R. X(6)(B)(3) and
(5)(A)(4). The court further ordered that respondent shall not be reinstated to the
practice of law in Ohio until respondent complies with the requirements for
reinstatement set forth in Gov.Bar R. X(7); respondent complies with the Supreme
Court Rules for the Government of the Bar of Ohio; respondent complies with this
and all other orders of the court; and this court orders respondent reinstated.

On April 14, 2005, the commission filed a recommendation pursuant to
Gov.Bar R. X(7)(B)(2), finding that the respondent has paid all fees assessed for
noncompliance, has made up all deficiencies, and is now in full compliance with
all requirements of Gov.Bar R. X, and recommending that the respondent be
reinstated to the practice of law in Ohio. On April 14, 2005, the commission
certified that respondent had completed the credit hours of continuing legal
education required during his suspension by this court's order of suspension. Upon
consideration thereof,

IT IS ORDERED by the court that the recommendation of the commission is
adopted and respondent, Theodore A. Amata, is hereby reinstated to the practice of
law.

5
04-21-05