Disciplinary Counsel v. Weber (Slip Opinion)
2021 Ohio 3907
| Ohio | 2021Background
- Robert M. Weber Jr., admitted in Ohio 2003, opened a client trust account in Feb 2016 and later operated a solo practice and then of-counsel at a small firm (2016–2017).
- While representing multiple personal-injury clients he received med-pay checks payable to those clients (totaling about $15,577 for three clients); some checks bore forged client signatures that Weber or his employee signed without client authorization.
- Weber deposited those med-pay checks into his trust account, did not notify clients or promptly deliver their funds, and did not transfer the funds to the firm trust account after leaving the firm; the trust account balance fell far below amounts owed.
- He also deposited personal and other non-client funds into the trust account, failed to perform monthly reconciliations from March 2016 through at least Aug. 8, 2018, delayed multiple client disbursements, and the account experienced overdrafts.
- The Board found violations of Prof.Cond.R. 1.15(a), 1.15(a)(5), 1.15(b), 1.15(d), and 8.4(c); Weber made restitution, cooperated, presented character evidence, and was no longer actively practicing at the time of the hearing.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether signing clients’ names and depositing med-pay checks without client authorization violated ethical rules | Weber’s conduct violated Prof.Cond.R. 1.15(d) and 8.4(c) for failing to notify/deliver client funds and for dishonest conduct | Weber claimed he deposited checks to pay clients’ medical bills, believed funds were subject to contingent-fee agreements, and did not profit; signing done for convenience | Court adopted Board: violations of Prof.Cond.R. 1.15(d) and 8.4(c) established |
| Whether Weber mismanaged his client trust account (mixing funds, failing reconciliations, delaying disbursements, overdrafts) | Relator alleged violations of Prof.Cond.R. 1.15(a), 1.15(a)(5), 1.15(b), and 1.15(d) based on deposits, lack of monthly reconciliations, commingling, and late client payments | Weber argued lack of intent to misappropriate, inexperience managing trust accounts, admitted errors, made restitution and cooperated | Court adopted Board: violations of 1.15(a), 1.15(a)(5), 1.15(b), and 1.15(d) proved |
| Appropriate sanction for the misconduct | Disciplinary Counsel recommended a one-year suspension, fully stayed on conditions including 6 hours CLE on trust-account management and payment of costs | Weber joined the recommendation; Board compared prior similar cases and recommended the same stayed suspension | Court imposed a one-year suspension, fully stayed on conditions: no further misconduct, 6 hours CLE on client-trust-account/fund management, and payment of costs; stay lifts on noncompliance |
Key Cases Cited
- Disciplinary Counsel v. Adelstein, 159 N.E.3d 1126 (Ohio 2020) (stayed one-year suspension for client-trust-account mismanagement, CLE condition)
- Disciplinary Counsel v. Gorby, 27 N.E.3d 510 (Ohio 2015) (stayed suspension with conditions and monitored probation where there was misappropriation but restitution and cooperation)