Cincinnati Bar Ass'n v. Kathman

Summary

The Ohio Supreme Court disciplined an attorney who participated in a living-trust marketing and preparation arrangement with nonattorneys. The court held that the attorney violated disciplinary rules prohibiting practicing under a trade name, sharing legal fees with a nonlawyer, and aiding the unauthorized practice of law, but did not violate the rule concerning interference with professional judgment. The court suspended the attorney from practice for six months.

Holdings

1. Kathman violated DR 2-102(B) by permitting his name to appear on the letterhead of the nonattorney Estate Preservation Group and related entities in a manner constituting practice under a trade name.
2. Kathman violated DR 3-102(A) by distributing portions of a client's legal-services fee to the Estate Plan, the Estate Preservation Group, and its representatives.
3. The evidence did not establish that Kathman violated DR 5-107(B), and the court adopted the board's conclusion finding no violation.
4. An attorney violates DR 3-101(A) when the attorney assists a nonattorney in marketing or selling legal trust documents to the public and does nothing more than summarily approve documents created by the nonattorney.
5. A six-month suspension from the practice of law was an appropriate sanction for Kathman's misconduct.

Questions Presented

1. Whether Kathman practiced under a trade name in violation of DR 2-102(B).
2. Whether Kathman shared legal fees with nonattorneys in violation of DR 3-102(A).
3. Whether Kathman permitted persons who recommended, employed, or paid him to direct or regulate his professional judgment in violation of DR 5-107(B).
4. Whether an attorney violates DR 3-101(A) by assisting nonattorneys who market or sell living trusts and by summarily approving trust documents prepared by nonattorneys.
5. What sanction was appropriate for the established disciplinary violations.

Disposition

other