Summary
The Ohio Supreme Court held that Prof.Cond.R. 3.4(c)'s prohibition against knowingly disobeying an obligation under a tribunal's rules applies to a lawyer's conduct occurring after a tribunal has issued a final order, not just before or during litigation. The court also found that an attorney's failure to notify a client of his suspension violated Prof.Cond.R. 1.4(a)(1) because the client's informed consent was required to proceed with representation. The respondent was permanently disbarred for continuing to practice law while under suspension, forging a client's signature, distributing settlement funds without court approval, and making false statements to the court and disciplinary counsel.
Holdings
- The prohibition against a lawyer's knowing disobedience of an obligation under the rules of a tribunal contained in Prof.Cond.R. 3.4(c) applies to a lawyer's conduct that occurs after a tribunal has issued a final order as well as to a lawyer's conduct that occurs before or during litigation.
- Sarver's failure to notify Mustin of his suspension and to obtain her informed consent to proceed with the representation violated Prof.Cond.R. 1.4(a)(1) because his actions placed Mustin in jeopardy of violating her fiduciary duties to the estate and required her informed consent.
- Permanent disbarment is the appropriate sanction to protect the public given Sarver's prior discipline, dishonest and selfish motive, multiple violations, harm caused, and lack of mitigating factors.
Questions Presented
- Whether Sarver violated Prof.Cond.R. 1.4(a)(1) by failing to inform Mustin of his suspension and obtain her informed consent.
- Whether Prof.Cond.R. 3.4(c) applies to a lawyer's conduct that occurs after a tribunal has issued a final order.
- Whether Sarver presented mitigating evidence.
- What is the appropriate sanction for Sarver's misconduct?
Disposition
disbarred
Cases Cited (22)
- Disciplinary Counsel v. Sarver, 155 Ohio St. 3d 100, 2018-Ohio-4717, 119 N.E.3d 405(prior disciplinary case)
- Disciplinary Counsel v. Robinson, 126 Ohio St. 3d 371, 2010-Ohio-3829, 933 N.E.2d 1095(followed)
- Cleveland Metro. Bar Assn. v. Azman, 147 Ohio St. 3d 379, 2016-Ohio-3393, 66 N.E.3d 695(followed)
- Columbus Bar Assn. v. Okuley, 154 Ohio St.3d 124, 2018-Ohio-3857, 111 N.E.3d 1173(followed)
- Disciplinary Counsel v. Sabroff, 123 Ohio St. 3d 182, 2009-Ohio-4205, 915 N.E.2d 307(followed)
- Dayton Bar Assn. v. Sullivan, 158 Ohio St. 3d 423, 2020-Ohio-124, 144 N.E.3d 401(followed)
- Disciplinary Counsel v. Hoskins, 150 Ohio St. 3d 41, 2017-Ohio-2924, 78 N.E.3d 845(followed)
- Disciplinary Counsel v. Fletcher, 135 Ohio St. 3d 404, 2013-Ohio-1510, 987 N.E.2d 678(followed)
- Disciplinary Counsel v. Frazier, 110 Ohio St. 3d 288, 2006-Ohio-4481, 853 N.E.2d 295(distinguished)
- Disciplinary Counsel v. Allison, 98 Ohio St. 3d 322, 2003-Ohio-776, 784 N.E.2d 695(followed)
Showing top 10 of 22.
Court Document
Open PDFLoading document…