Opinion
No. 85-44
Decided April 30, 1986.
Attorneys at law — Misconduct — indefinite suspension — Neglect of legal matter — Failure to register as attorney under Gov. Bar R. VI(1) — Failure to cooperate in investigation.
ON CERTIFIED REPORT by the Board of Commissioners on Grievances and Discipline of the Bar.
Relator, Akron Bar Association, brought this disciplinary action against respondent, John A. Thorpe III, alleging three counts of misconduct in its complaint.
Count I of the complaint charged violations of DR 1-102(A)(4), (5) and (6), in that respondent engaged in conduct involving dishonesty, fraud, deceit or misrepresentation, engaged in conduct prejudicial to the administration of justice, and engaged in conduct adversely reflecting upon his fitness to practice law.
Count II of the complaint charged a violation of DR 6-101(A)(3) in that respondent neglected a legal matter entrusted to him by a client.
Count III of the complaint further alleged that respondent failed to register with the Supreme Court of Ohio as required by Gov. Bar R. VI. Respondent did not answer the complaint.
On September 25, 1985, a hearing was held before a three-member panel of the Board of Commissioners on Grievances and Discipline of the Bar. Respondent failed to appear. The evidence taken disclosed the following facts:
Respondent agreed to represent Mrs. Joanne Fortney, who was named the defendant in a divorce proceeding commenced by her former husband, Shawn Sullivan. Fortney had been served with a copy of the divorce complaint and a summons. Respondent asked for and received a $50 retainer from Fortney. He also took the summons and complaint which had been served on her.
Respondent did make an inquiry about the marital property and was informed by Fortney that she and Sullivan jointly owned a home in which he resided. Respondent indicated that he would have the property appraised and, on a later occasion, told Fortney that the property had been appraised at $45,000.
Fortney subsequently received a notice regarding a hearing on the complaint. She gave the notice to respondent, who later advised Fortney that the hearing had been postponed. She was, however, not again contacted by respondent regarding a hearing. Fortney later learned that her husband had been granted a divorce and been awarded both Fortney's interest in their real estate and custody of their son. The judgment entry of August 23, 1984 recited that Fortney had failed either to answer the complaint or to appear at the hearing.
Fortney then contacted another attorney regarding the matter. He filed a motion for relief from judgment which was subsequently overruled. Fortney incurred attorney fees and court costs of $240 for this representation. Respondent has not returned the $50 retainer fee advanced by Fortney.
The board found that although respondent was admitted to the practice of law in Ohio, he had failed to file and pay his attorney registration fee with the Clerk of the Supreme Court of Ohio for the two-year period ending August 31, 1985.
Based upon the foregoing, the board concluded that respondent was guilty of misconduct in his representation of Fortney, in that he violated DR 1-102(A)(4) by engaging in conduct involving dishonesty, fraud, deceit or misrepresentation; DR 1-102(A)(5) by engaging in conduct prejudicial to the administration of justice; DR 1-102(A)(6) by engaging in conduct adversely reflecting on his fitness to practice law; and DR 6-101(A)(3) by neglecting a legal matter entrusted to him. The board additionally concluded that respondent was guilty of misconduct in that he failed to register as a practicing attorney as required by Gov. Bar R. VI(1).
The board recommended that respondent be indefinitely suspended from the practice of law in Ohio. Respondent filed no objections to the board's recommendation.
Roetzel Andress, George A. Clark; Amer, Cunningham Brennan Co., L.P.A., and Joseph F. Cook, for relator.
We have carefully considered the board's report and concur with the findings and conclusions of the board.
It is clear that respondent neglected his representation of Fortney in the divorce complaint filed against her by her former husband. Respondent thus violated DR 6-101(A)(3).
Further, the board's findings of fact demonstrate that respondent's conduct resulted in the loss by Fortney of any rights she may have had in the marital property she jointly owned with her former husband. Respondent thus violated DR 1-102(A)(4), (5) and (6) by engaging in conduct involving dishonesty, fraud, deceit or misrepresentation, conduct prejudicial to the administration of justice and conduct adversely reflecting on his fitness to practice law.
Additionally, respondent did not timely register as a practicing attorney with the Clerk of the Supreme Court as required by Gov. Bar R. VI(1) and is thereby subject to discipline pursuant to Gov. Bar R. VI(6) and V.
We agree with the recommendation of the board that respondent be indefinitely suspended from the practice of law. Respondent's failure to cooperate in the investigation of this matter and his failure to appear at any stage of these proceedings make this an appropriate sanction. See Clermont Cty. Bar Assn. v. Meeker (1984), 14 Ohio St.3d 21, 23.
Accordingly, we adopt the findings, conclusions and recommendation of the board and hereby suspend respondent from the practice of law for an indefinite period.
Judgment accordingly.
CELEBREZZE, C.J., SWEENEY, LOCHER, HOLMES, C. BROWN, DOUGLAS and WRIGHT, JJ., concur.