Summary
The Ohio Supreme Court disciplined Marcus Edward Coleman for misappropriating and commingling client funds, making false statements about their status, failing to maintain required client-fund records, and failing to reconcile his trust account monthly. The court imposed a two-year suspension, with 18 months stayed subject to practice-monitoring and no-further-misconduct conditions.
Topics
Practice areas
Questions Presented
- Whether Coleman's conduct violated the Ohio Rules of Professional Conduct governing the segregation, recordkeeping, and reconciliation of client trust funds and prohibiting dishonesty, fraud, deceit, or misrepresentation.
- What sanction was appropriate for Coleman's misappropriation of client funds, false representations, trust-account violations, mitigating circumstances, and restitution.
Holdings
- Coleman violated Prof.Cond.R. 1.15(a), 1.15(a)(2), 1.15(a)(3), 1.15(a)(5), and 8.4(c) by commingling and misappropriating client funds, failing to maintain required trust-account records and monthly reconciliations, and falsely representing that the funds remained in his client trust account.
- A two-year suspension from the practice of law, with 18 months stayed on the conditions that Coleman work with a law-practice monitor approved by disciplinary counsel and commit no further misconduct, was appropriate. If he violated the stay conditions, the stay would be lifted and he would serve the full two-year suspension.
Key quotations
“Accordingly, Marcus Edward Coleman is suspended from the practice of law in Ohio for two years with 18 months stayed on the conditions that he work with a law-practice monitor approved by relator for the duration of the stayed suspension and engage in no further misconduct.” (at 39)
Factual background
Coleman received $18,000 from his client, James F. Love, to purchase stocks, but deposited the money into his personal account and later misappropriated most of it. He subsequently transferred the funds to a client trust account, again misappropriated them, closed the account, and falsely assured Love that the money remained in trust. Coleman ultimately made full restitution by March 22, 2014, but violated multiple client-trust-account and dishonesty rules.
Procedural history
Disciplinary counsel filed a complaint alleging that Coleman misappropriated and commingled client funds, falsely represented that the funds were held in trust, failed to maintain required records, and failed to reconcile his client trust account monthly. After a hearing, a panel recommended a two-year suspension with 18 months stayed, while the board recommended that the entire suspension be stayed. The Supreme Court adopted the board's findings and conclusions but imposed a two-year suspension with 18 months stayed on conditions.