Opinion
No. 90-403
Submitted April 11, 1990 —
Decided September 12, 1990
Attorneys at law — Misconduct — Public reprimand — Engaging in conduct that adversely reflects on attorney's fitness to practice law — Engaging in sexual relations with client.
ON CERTIFIED REPORT by the Board of Commissioners on Grievances and Discipline of the Supreme Court, No. 90-1.
In a complaint filed January 2, 1990, relator, Office of Disciplinary Counsel, charged that respondent, Thomas Garrett Ressing, had violated DR 1-102(A)(6) (engaging in conduct that adversely reflects on an attorney's fitness to practice law). In his answer, respondent admitted the facts and misconduct alleged in the complaint. Respondent waived a hearing, and the matter was submitted to a panel of the Board of Commissioners on Grievances and Discipline of the Supreme Court on joint stipulations.
The record substantiates that, in 1986, respondent was asked by one of his female clients to represent her in a divorce action. The woman paid respondent $60 for court filing fees. Thereafter, respondent and the woman engaged in sexual relations on more than one occasion while she was a client. During this relationship, respondent did not charge the woman for his legal services, and sometimes gave her money. However, no evidence established that respondent accepted sex in exchange for his services.
Based on the foregoing, the panel found that respondent had violated DR 1-102(A)(6), and recommended the sanction suggested by the parties, a public reprimand. The board concurred in the panel's findings and its recommendation.
J. Warren Bettis, disciplinary counsel, and Karen B. Hull, for relator.
Charles W. Kettlewell, for respondent.
We agree with the board's findings of misconduct and its recommendation. Thus, we hereby publicly reprimand respondent for having violated DR 1-102(A)(6). Costs taxed to respondent.
Judgment accordingly.
MOYER, C.J., SWEENEY, HOLMES, DOUGLAS, WRIGHT, H. BROWN and RESNICK, JJ., concur.