Greene County Bar Ass'n v. Saunders
132 Ohio St. 3d 29
| Ohio | 2012Background
- Saunders, an Ohio attorney (admitted 2000), was indefinitely suspended and later permanently disbarred for misconduct including misappropriation of client funds.
- Relator Greene County Bar Association filed a disciplinary complaint after Saunders neglected matters, converted funds, and failed to respond to investigations.
- Default judgment procedural posture due to Saunders’s failure to answer; master commissioner found significant misconduct with sworn evidence.
- Board adopted findings, dismissed some alleged violations, but recommended permanent disbarment.
- Court adopted board findings on most counts, rejected some hearsay and evidentiary issues, and imposed permanent disbarment with taxed costs.
- Seriousness of misappropriation (>$40,000) and aggravating factors supported disbarment.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Saunders violated specific ethics rules (DR 1-102(A)(4), 6-101(A)(3), 7-101(A)(1), 9-102(E)(1)). | Saunders committed misappropriation and related misconduct. | Saunders disputes some findings or their applicability. | Yes; violations established for DR 1-102(A)(4), 6-101(A)(3), 7-101(A)(1), 9-102(E)(1). |
| Whether Count Three evidence suffices to find conversion of estate funds. | Evidence shows misappropriation; related convictions support misconduct. | Record insufficient to tie convictions to the estate funds or establish misappropriation. | Court did not adopt Count Three findings of misappropriation due to evidentiary gaps; DR 1-102(A)(4) not proven for this count. |
| Whether Count Four supports dishonesty and related misconduct. | Failure to file brief and lying to a government official show dishonesty. | Some evidence insufficient to prove responsibility or dishonesty. | Duty to file dismissed for lack of showing Saunders’ responsibility; remaining misconduct upheld except 1.3 and 8.4(c) in part. |
| What sanction is warranted given Saunders’s misconduct? | Disbarment warranted due to misappropriation and pattern of misconduct. | (Not explicitly stated in excerpt) | Permanent disbarment appropriate given misappropriation >$40,000, aggravating factors, and prior suspensions. |
Key Cases Cited
- Trumbull Cty. Bar Assn. v. Kafantaris, 121 Ohio St.3d 387 (Ohio 2009) (disbarment presumptive for misappropriation of client funds)
- Cleveland Bar Assn. v. Dixon, 95 Ohio St.3d 490 (Ohio 2002) (disbarment appropriate for serious professional misconduct)
- Dayton Bar Assn. v. Sebree, 104 Ohio St.3d 448 (Ohio 2004) (communications and evidentiary standards in default proceedings)
- Northwestern Bar Assn. v. Lauber, 104 Ohio St.3d 121 (Ohio 2004) (sworn documentary evidence required for default proceedings)