Disciplinary Counsel v. Detweiler
135 Ohio St. 3d 447
Ohio2013Background
- Detweiler, admitted in 1987, faced disciplinary issues in Ohio.
- October 2010 public reprimand for an improper sexual relationship with a client.
- July 26, 2011 charge for soliciting sexual favors and potential client-conflict due to personal interests.
- Panel and board recommended six-month stayed suspension; board later urged harsher sanction.
- Court imposed one-year actual suspension with OLAP evaluation and compliance with treatment recommendations.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Detweiler violated ethics rules | DisciplinaryCounsel: misconduct violated 1.7(a)(2), 1.8(j), 8.4(h). | Detweiler: prior panel stance, not aligned with one-year actual suspension. | Violated rules; one-year actual suspension imposed. |
| Appropriate sanction given misconduct and vulnerability | Board found vulnerable client and pattern of misconduct warranting harsher sanction. | Panel recommended six-month stayed suspension. | One-year actual suspension appropriate. |
| Impact of client vulnerability on sanction | Client financially vulnerable compelled continuation of representation. | No clear financial tie; notes client’s vulnerability only. | Vulnerability supported increased sanction. |
| Need for OLAP evaluation and treatment | OLAP evaluation and treatment needed to ensure rehabilitation. | Consent-to-discipline already favored lighter sanction. | Conditioned reinstatement on OLAP evaluation and compliance. |
| Costs allocation | Costs taxed to Detweiler as sanction. | Not contested. | Costs taxed to Detweiler. |
Key Cases Cited
- Disciplinary Counsel v. Detweiler, 127 Ohio St.3d 73 (2010-Ohio-5033) (prior public reprimand for sexual relationship with client)
- Toledo Bar Assn. v. Burkholder, 109 Ohio St.3d 443 (2006-Ohio-2817) (six-month, conditionally stayed suspension for inappropriate sexual advances)
- Disciplinary Counsel v. Moore, 2004-Ohio-734 (2004-Ohio-734) (one-year fully stayed suspension for unwelcome sexual remarks)
- Disciplinary Counsel v. Sturgeon, 2006-Ohio-5708 (2006-Ohio-5708) (permanent disbarment for solicited sex and related misconduct)
- Cleveland Metro. Bar Assn. v. Lockshin, 125 Ohio St.3d 529 (2010-Ohio-2207) (indefinite suspension for unwelcome sexual advances and related conduct)