Disciplinary Counsel v. Anthony, 138 Ohio St. 3d 129

Mark Allan Anthony, admitted 1991, voluntarily left active practice and served as business manager at St. Francis de Sales; over ~4 years he embezzled parish funds to support a gambling addiction.
He wrote ~60 improper checks/withdrawals and used the parish credit card >60 times; pled guilty in 2007 to grand theft, served prison time, later placed on community control; prior suspensions for registration and CLE noncompliance remain in effect.
Parties and the disciplinary board stipulated to misconduct and jointly recommended indefinite suspension; disagreement remained over restitution as a condition of reinstatement.
Disciplinary board found Anthony misappropriated approximately $118,000, while the Archdiocese’s insurer (Gallagher Bassett/Lloyd’s) calculated $127,649.15 in losses; trial court later reduced criminal restitution because the victim had been made whole by insurance payments.
The board identified multiple aggravating factors (dishonest motive, pattern, multiple offenses, harm, failure to repay) and mitigating factors (cooperation, remorse, treatment steps for gambling), but rejected finding of submission of false evidence.
The Supreme Court indefinitely suspended Anthony, conditioned reinstatement on completion of OLAP-approved treatment and payment of restitution of $127,649.15 (less amounts already paid); dissent would have disbarred him.

Issue	Relator's Argument	Anthony's Argument	Held
Whether Anthony’s conduct violated ethical rules	Theft and deceit violated DR 1-102(A)(3),(4),(6)	Conduct should be mitigated by addiction/treatment efforts	Court held he violated those provisions and accepted board’s findings
Proper restitution amount for discipline/reinstatement	Reinstatement should require full repayment of total calculated loss ($127,649.15)	Criminal court’s restitution was reduced since insurer/parish were made whole; Anthony paid $13,425 and argued he owes no more	Court conditioned reinstatement on payment of $127,649.15 less amounts paid to date
Appropriate disciplinary sanction	Indefinite suspension with reinstatement conditioned on restitution and treatment	Sought recognition of mitigating factors (cooperation, treatment, remorse) to avoid disbarment	Court imposed indefinite suspension; required OLAP-approved treatment and full restitution as reinstatement conditions
Weight of mitigating/aggravating factors (including prior registration/CLE suspensions)	Aggravating factors and failure to fully repay support strict sanction; prior registration suspension counts as prior discipline	Mitigating: prison sentence served, cooperation, ongoing GA/OLAP involvement; CLE noncompliance should not be weighed	Court treated registration suspension as aggravating, accorded some mitigation for addiction treatment efforts, but found overall aggravation greater and imposed suspension

Disciplinary Counsel v. Muntean, 127 Ohio St.3d 427 (attorney indefinitely suspended for significant embezzlement while serving as treasurer)
Disciplinary Counsel v. Kelly, 121 Ohio St.3d 39 (indefinite suspension conditioned on full restitution for embezzlement from charity)
Akron Bar Assn. v. Smithern, 125 Ohio St.3d 72 (indefinite suspension for stealing substantial funds from employer; restitution conditioning)
Stark Cty. Bar Assn. v. Williams, 137 Ohio St.3d 112 (attorney permanently disbarred for large thefts and failure to make restitution; establishes strong precedent favoring disbarment in misappropriation cases)
Disciplinary Counsel v. Longino, 128 Ohio St.3d 426 (disbarment is presumptive sanction for misappropriation of client funds)
Disciplinary Counsel v. Wickerham, 132 Ohio St.3d 205 (pattern of dishonesty and misappropriation supports disbarment)
Disciplinary Counsel v. Brickley, 131 Ohio St.3d 228 (theft convictions support disbarment)