Akron Bar Assn. v. Wittbrod

Summary

The Supreme Court of Ohio held that Harry J. Wittbrod violated professional-conduct rules by failing to inform a client that he lacked malpractice insurance and by attempting to limit his malpractice liability through settlement negotiations. The court imposed a six-month suspension from practice, stayed on conditions including mental-health treatment, monitored probation, and law-office-management training.

Holdings

1. Wittbrod violated DR 1-104(A) and (B) by failing to advise his client that he did not maintain professional-liability insurance and failing to document that notice.
2. Wittbrod violated DR 6-102 or Prof.Cond.R. 1.8(h)(2) by attempting to obtain dismissal of the client's pending grievance as part of settlement negotiations relating to the malpractice claim.
3. A six-month suspension from the practice of law, stayed in its entirety on conditions involving mental-health treatment, law-office-management continuing legal education, and one-year monitoring if Wittbrod resumes practice, was appropriate.

Questions Presented

1. Whether Wittbrod violated the applicable disciplinary rules by failing to advise and document that his client had not been provided notice that he lacked professional-liability insurance.
2. Whether Wittbrod violated DR 6-102 or Prof.Cond.R. 1.8(h)(2) by attempting to obtain dismissal of a client's pending disciplinary grievance during settlement negotiations in a malpractice matter.
3. What sanction was appropriate for the established misconduct.

Disposition

other