Ohio State Bar Assn. v. Bruner

Summary

The Supreme Court of Ohio disciplined Harvey B. Bruner for neglecting client matters, failing to reasonably communicate with clients, and charging clearly excessive fees. The court adopted the parties’ consent-to-discipline agreement and imposed a two-year suspension stayed on the condition that Bruner reimburse three clients a total of $12,000.

Holdings

1. Bruner violated Prof.Cond.R. 1.3 by failing to act with reasonable diligence, Prof.Cond.R. 1.4 by failing to reasonably communicate with clients, and Prof.Cond.R. 1.5(a) by charging clearly excessive fees.
2. A two-year suspension from the practice of law, fully stayed on the condition that Bruner make specified restitution, was warranted and the consent-to-discipline agreement was adopted.

Questions Presented

1. Whether Bruner violated Prof.Cond.R. 1.3, 1.4, and 1.5(a) through neglect, inadequate communication, and charging clearly excessive fees.
2. Whether the court should adopt the parties' consent-to-discipline agreement imposing a two-year suspension stayed on the condition that Bruner pay specified restitution.

Disposition

other