Summary
The Ohio Supreme Court considered professional-misconduct charges against an attorney who failed to perform promised foreclosure work, misused and failed to refund client retainers, neglected client matters, and failed to cooperate with an investigation. The court adopted findings that the attorney violated multiple disciplinary rules and Gov.Bar R. V(4)(G), and imposed a two-year suspension, with the second year stayed subject to restitution, monitored probation, and compliance conditions.
Holdings
- Ryan violated DR 1-102(A)(4), DR 6-101(A)(3), DR 7-101(A)(2), DR 9-102(A), DR 9-102(B)(3), DR 9-102(B)(4), and Gov. Bar R. V(4)(G), as found by the board.
- A two-year suspension from the practice of law, with the second year stayed subject to restitution and one year of monitored probation, was appropriate.
Questions Presented
- Whether Ryan violated the specified Ohio Disciplinary Rules and Gov. Bar R. V(4)(G) through neglect, failure to perform contractual legal services, mishandling and failure to return client funds, dishonesty, and failure to cooperate with the disciplinary investigation.
- What sanction was appropriate given Ryan's misconduct and the aggravating and mitigating factors.
Disposition
other
Cases Cited (4)
- Cuyahoga Cty. Bar Assn. v. Okocha (1998), 83 Ohio St.3d 3, 697 N.E.2d 594(followed)
- Stark Cty. Bar Assn. v. Watterson, 103 Ohio St.3d 322, 2004-Ohio-4776, 815 N.E.2d 386(followed)
- Cuyahoga Cty. Bar Assn. v. Jurczenko, 106 Ohio St.3d 123, 2005-Ohio-4101, 832 N.E.2d 720(followed)
- Columbus Bar Assn. v. Torian, 106 Ohio St.3d 14, 2005-Ohio-3216, 829 N.E.2d 1210(followed)
Cited In (0)
No citing cases on record yet.
Court Document
Open PDFLoading document…