Summary
The Ohio Supreme Court reviewed disciplinary charges against attorney Betty Groner arising from false and misleading statements filed in probate court concerning a proposed estate fiduciary. The court sustained her objections in part, dismissed alleged violations involving dishonesty and related misconduct, and upheld violations concerning unsupported and false statements in pleadings. Groner received a six-month suspension, stayed in full on the condition that she commit no further disciplinary violations.
Topics
Practice areas
Questions Presented
- Whether clear and convincing evidence established that Groner violated Prof.Cond.R. 3.1, 3.3(a)(1) and (3), and 4.1 by filing false statements and misleading arguments in a probate-court pleading.
- Whether the evidence established violations of Prof.Cond.R. 8.4(c), (d), and (h) based on Groner's conduct.
- What disciplinary sanction was appropriate in light of the violations and aggravating and mitigating factors.
Holdings
- Clear and convincing evidence established that Groner violated Prof.Cond.R. 3.1, 3.3(a)(1) and (3), and 4.1 by filing a pleading containing false statements and assertions without a basis in law or fact.
- The evidence was insufficient to establish by clear and convincing evidence that Groner violated Prof.Cond.R. 8.4(c), (d), or (h), so those charges were dismissed.
- A six-month suspension from the practice of law, with the entire suspension stayed on the condition that Groner commit no further disciplinary violations, was appropriate.
Key quotations
“There is insufficient evidence that Groner violated Prof.Cond.R. 8.4(c), (d), and (h), and we dismiss those charges.” (¶ 4)
“Therefore, we find that the circumstances in Groner’s case warrant a six-month suspension from the practice of law with the entire six months stayed on the condition that she commit no further misconduct.” (¶ 26)
Factual background
Groner represented Zachary Hopson in opposing Brenda Joyce Fowler's appointment as fiduciary of a probate estate. She relied on an inadequately reviewed commercial background report and federal court records concerning other individuals with names similar to Fowler's, then filed objections alleging that Fowler had a felony record and bankruptcy that would prevent her from obtaining a probate bond. After learning that the information was erroneous, Groner sought to remove most of the allegations. The probate matter was successfully mediated, and the probate court did not rely on or was not misled by the submission.
Procedural history
The Akron Bar Association filed a disciplinary complaint against Betty Groner alleging violations arising from false and misleading allegations in a probate-court pleading. A panel conducted a hearing, and the board adopted findings that Groner violated Prof.Cond.R. 3.1, 3.3(a)(1) and (3), 4.1, and 8.4(c), (d), and (h), recommending a 12-month suspension with six months stayed. The Supreme Court of Ohio sustained Groner's objections in part, dismissed the Prof.Cond.R. 8.4(c), (d), and (h) charges, and imposed a fully stayed six-month suspension.