Summary
The Supreme Court of Ohio held that Paul Dare Harmon violated Prof.Cond.R. 8.4(c), (d), and (h) by failing to disclose assets and making false statements during bankruptcy proceedings. The court suspended Harmon from practicing law for two years, with the second year stayed subject to conditions including no further misconduct, a mental-health evaluation, and compliance with any Ohio Lawyers Assistance Program treatment recommendations.
Holdings
- Harmon violated Prof.Cond.R. 8.4(c) by engaging in dishonesty, fraud, deceit, or misrepresentation; Prof.Cond.R. 8.4(d) by engaging in conduct prejudicial to the administration of justice; and Prof.Cond.R. 8.4(h) by engaging in conduct that adversely reflected on his fitness to practice law.
- A two-year suspension from the practice of law, with the second year stayed on conditions, was warranted.
Questions Presented
- Whether Harmon violated Prof.Cond.R. 8.4(c), (d), and (h) by failing to disclose assets and making false statements in his bankruptcy proceedings.
- Whether the appropriate sanction was a two-year suspension with the second year stayed on conditions.
Disposition
other
Cases Cited (6)
- Disciplinary Counsel v. Bricker, 137 Ohio St. 3d 35, 2013-Ohio-3998, 997 N.E.2d 500, ¶ 21(followed)
- Stark Cty. Bar Assn. v. Buttacavoli, 96 Ohio St. 3d 424, 2002-Ohio-4743, 775 N.E.2d 818, ¶ 16(followed)
- Disciplinary Counsel v. Broeren, 115 Ohio St. 3d 473, 2007-Ohio-5251, 875 N.E.2d 935, ¶ 21(followed)
- Toledo Bar Assn. v. Miller, 132 Ohio St. 3d 63, 2012-Ohio-1880, 969 N.E.2d 239, ¶¶ 4-9, 16(distinguished)
- Disciplinary Counsel v. Potter, 126 Ohio St. 3d 50, 2010-Ohio-2521, 930 N.E.2d 307, ¶ 10(followed)
- Disciplinary Counsel v. Rohrer, 124 Ohio St. 3d 65, 2009-Ohio-5930, 919 N.E.2d 180, ¶ 45(followed)
Cited In (0)
No citing cases on record yet.
Court Document
Open PDFLoading document…