Summary
The Ohio Supreme Court reviewed disciplinary charges against attorney Thomas Joseph Foster arising primarily from his handling of bankruptcy matters. The court adopted findings that Foster engaged in dishonesty, neglect, incompetence, failure to communicate, and conduct prejudicial to the administration of justice. Foster was indefinitely suspended from practicing law, with full restitution to former clients required before seeking reinstatement.
Holdings
- Foster's conduct violated DR 1-102(A)(4), DR 1-102(A)(5), DR 1-102(A)(6), DR 6-101(A)(1), DR 6-101(A)(3), DR 7-101(A)(1), and DR 7-101(A)(3).
- Foster was indefinitely suspended from the practice of law in Ohio, and full and complete restitution to former clients for payments made and services not received was made a prerequisite to any application for reinstatement.
Questions Presented
- Whether Foster's pattern of neglect, inattention, inadequate communication, misrepresentation, and failure to competently handle bankruptcy matters violated the specified Ohio Disciplinary Rules.
- What sanction was appropriate for Foster's disciplinary violations.
Disposition
other
Cases Cited (4)
- Dayton Bar Assn. v. Andrews, 79 Ohio St. 3d 109, 112, 679 N.E.2d 1093, 1095 (1997)(followed)
- Columbus Bar Assn. v. Flanagan, 77 Ohio St. 3d 381, 383, 674 N.E.2d 681, 683 (1997)(followed)
- Cincinnati Bar Assn. v. Wolosin, 84 Ohio St. 3d 401, 704 N.E.2d 566 (1999)(followed)
- Disciplinary Counsel v. Dahling, 90 Ohio St. 3d 246, 737 N.E.2d 25 (2000)(followed)
Cited In (0)
No citing cases on record yet.
Court Document
Open PDFLoading document…