Columbus Bar Assn. v. Peden, 2012 Ohio 5766

Respondent John J. Peden is an Ohio attorney admitted in 1983; board sought indefinite suspension and reinstatement conditions.
In 2009–2010, Peden overdrew client trust accounts and failed to maintain a separate trust account, with funds deposited into operating accounts.
Relator alleged Peden failed to notify clients of malpractice-insurance lapse, suspension, and withdrawal, and to provide competent and diligent representation.
Panel found misconduct across multiple rules, including trust-account violations and lack of communication, and recommended indefinite suspension with reinstatement conditions.
Court adopted board’s findings, suspended Peden indefinitely, and set reinstatement conditions including restitution and ongoing monitoring.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Did Peden commit trust-account misconduct?	Board found overdrafts and mismanagement.	Peden denies intentional misconduct, claims inadvertent.	Yes, trust-account violations established.
Did Peden fail to notify clients about lack of insurance and suspension?	Board found failure to disclose insurance lapse and suspension.	Peden argues no deliberate concealment.	Yes, required disclosure proven.
Did Peden provide competent and diligent representation?	Board found neglect and inadequate communication.	Peden asserts efforts were timely.	Yes, findings supported; violations of 1.1, 1.3, 1.4.
Did Peden cooperate in the disciplinary investigation?	Board found repeated non-cooperation.	Peden contends minimal cooperation.	Yes, violation of 8.1(b) established.

Columbus Bar Assn. v. Peden, 118 Ohio St.3d 244 (2008-Ohio-2237) (prior disciplinary proceeding and conditions; related to this case)
Boggs, 129 Ohio St.3d 190 (2011-Ohio-2637) (indefinite suspension for pattern of misconduct with trust-account issues)
Van Sickle, 128 Ohio St.3d 376 (2011-Ohio-774) (indefinite suspension; similar mental-condition mitigating factor analysis)