2016 Ohio 1172
Ohio2016Background
- Steven Edward Hillman, admitted 1973, failed to timely file federal personal income-tax returns for 2009, 2010, and 2011; he pled guilty to a misdemeanor for willful failure to file the 2011 return and acknowledged the earlier failures.
- Federal sentence: five years probation, six months house arrest, 200 hours community service, and restitution to the IRS; as of the hearing, restitution arrangement not finalized.
- Disciplinary counsel charged Hillman with professional misconduct under Prof.Cond.R. 8.4(h) for conduct reflecting adversely on his fitness to practice law.
- Parties initially agreed to a one-year suspension stayed on conditions; the Board accepted but the Supreme Court remanded for further proceedings.
- On remand, a board panel found misconduct, noted mitigating factors (cooperation, community service, long-term CPA reliance, no client harm) and a minor aggravating factor (two brief prior registration suspensions), and recommended a one-year suspension fully stayed on conditions.
- The Supreme Court adopted the board’s findings and imposed a one-year suspension, stayed in its entirety on conditions: pay back taxes per IRS, timely pay current taxes, complete a law-office management class within one year, and avoid further misconduct; costs taxed to Hillman.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Hillman’s failure to file federal returns constitutes professional misconduct | Failure to file returns is conduct that adversely reflects on fitness to practice and warrants discipline | Conduct unrelated to clients and caused by CPA reliance; mitigation counsels against severe sanction | Court held violation of Prof.Cond.R. 8.4(h); misconduct established |
| Appropriate sanction for misdemeanor tax conviction and related conduct | One-year suspension, with conditions/supervision appropriate given misconduct and precedent | Argues for leniency due to mitigation (cooperation, community service, no client harm, reliance on CPA) | Court imposed one-year suspension fully stayed on conditions (payments to IRS, timely current taxes, law-office management class, no further misconduct) |
| Weight of aggravating and mitigating factors | Prior suspensions and criminal conviction are aggravating; but mitigation should reduce sanction | Emphasized mitigating evidence: cooperation, pro bono and community work, CPA reliance, acceptance of responsibility, collateral federal sanctions | Court gave limited weight to prior short suspensions, found mitigation persuasive, resulting in stayed one-year suspension |
| Whether precedent supports a stayed one-year suspension | Disciplinary counsel cites analogous tax-filing cases imposing stayed one-year suspensions | Hillman emphasizes differences and mitigation but concedes analogous cases exist | Court relied on precedent and imposed the same sanction as similar cases |
Key Cases Cited
- Lake Cty. Bar Assn. v. Ezzone, 102 Ohio St.3d 79, 806 N.E.2d 991 (2004) (upholding one-year suspension stayed on conditions for failure to file income-tax return)
- Cuyahoga Cty. Bar Assn. v. Veneziano, 120 Ohio St.3d 451, 900 N.E.2d 185 (2008) (one-year suspension stayed on conditions for failure to file tax returns and pay withholding taxes)
- Disciplinary Counsel v. Broeren, 115 Ohio St.3d 473, 875 N.E.2d 935 (2007) (discussing consideration of aggravating/mitigating factors under Gov.Bar R. V(13))
- Stark Cty. Bar Assn. v. Buttacavoli, 96 Ohio St.3d 424, 775 N.E.2d 818 (2002) (setting out factors considered in imposing sanctions)