Opinion
No. 89-1131
Submitted October 25, 1989 —
Decided January 3, 1990.
Attorneys at law — Misconduct — One-year suspension — Filing false income tax returns.
ON CERTIFIED REPORT by the Board of Commissioners on Grievances and Discipline of the Supreme Court, No. 88-44.
Relator, Allen County Bar Association, filed a complaint against respondent, James C. King, on December 2, 1988, charging him with violating DR 1-102(A)(3) (illegal conduct involving moral turpitude), 1-102(A)(4) (conduct involving dishonesty, fraud, deceit, or misrepresentation), and 1-102(A)(6) (conduct that adversely reflects on the fitness to practice law), for having been found guilty of one felony count of falsification of his federal income tax return. Respondent substantially admitted the allegations of the complaint.
On April 21, 1989, a hearing was held before a panel of the board of commissioners. On May 10, 1989, the relator and respondent filed an agreed stipulation of facts. The stipulation acknowledged that respondent had been charged and convicted in federal district court, that he did file false individual income tax returns in 1984 and 1985, and that in consideration of his nolo contendere plea, he was not prosecuted for any violations in tax year 1985.
It was also stipulated that the federal court imposed a suspended sentence, probation for two years (until November 1990), a fine of $10,000, and an order to perform two hundred hours of community service; that for tax years 1984 and 1985 respondent has filed all proper tax returns and paid all taxes, penalties, and interest due; and that all fines, penalties, and court costs in the United States District Court have been fully resolved and paid.
Upon his conviction, respondent petitioned the Supreme Court of Ohio to avoid the possibility of an immediate suspension for having been convicted of a felony as provided by Gov. Bar R. V, Section 9. Upon consideration of the mitigating circumstances, the Supreme Court stayed the imposition of any sanction for six months until June 5, 1989. See (1988), 40 Ohio St.3d 703, 534 N.E.2d 844.
The panel hearing disclosed that respondent filed a false tax return in an unsuccessful attempt to save a business he had worked at while attending school. Because this early job had given him the first sense of self-worth, and the friendship of the store owners was of the utmost importance to him, respondent bought the failing business. Since respondent held himself to be personally responsible for its continuance, he diverted substantial earnings from his law practice to the failing business.
Many members of the legal community wrote letters or testified to respondent's professional competency and fitness to practice law, and to his beneficial involvement in the affairs of his community. A fair summary of the testimony would indicate that in twenty years as a licensed attorney, respondent has established a record of outstanding achievement. It also appears from the hearing that no client's interests were affected or prejudiced by respondent's conduct.
The panel found that respondent had violated DR 1-102(A)(4), in that he engaged in conduct involving dishonesty, fraud, deceit or misrepresentation when he filed the false tax returns. It recommended a six-month suspension followed by a period of probation that would end with the probationary period of the federal court in November 1990.
The board adopted the panel's findings, but recommended that respondent be suspended from the practice of law for one year. The board believed this penalty was more consistent with our prior decisions than was the panel's recommendation. Additionally, the board recommended the costs of the proceedings be taxed to respondent.
Fisher, Vandemark Bender, Michael J. Bender, Hurt, Mortiz Johnson, Jerry M. Johnson, Gooding, Huffman Kelly and Lawrence A. Huffman, for relator.
Clark Eyrich, Stephen T. MacConnell and David S. Levine, for respondent.
We agree that respondent violated DR 1-102(A)(4), and we adopt the board's recommendation. Respondent is hereby suspended from the practice of law in Ohio for one year. Costs taxed to respondent.
Judgment accordingly.
MOYER, C.J., SWEENEY, HOLMES, DOUGLAS, WRIGHT, H. BROWN and RESNICK, JJ., concur.