In Re Application of Callam
150 Ohio St. 3d 311
| Ohio | 2017Background
- Michael A. Callam was admitted to the Ohio bar in Nov. 2014 after passing the July 2014 bar exam.
- Prior to admission he held an Ohio insurance license; his father (unlicensed) sold insurance and sometimes signed applications for Callam or had Callam sign for him.
- A client complaint triggered an Ohio Department of Insurance investigation; Callam signed a false company response and gave investigators untruthful statements in Jan. and Sept. 2014, and supplied an unverified client list.
- Callam surrendered his insurance license for cause (Oct. 2014), was later indicted/pleaded guilty to a misdemeanor count of complicity to sell insurance without a license, and suffered civil-liability exposure. He failed to disclose the investigation, license surrender, and related lawsuits on his bar/registration applications.
- A Board panel recommended revocation of his law license but allowed reapplication after two years; the Board recommended permanent exclusion. The Supreme Court revoked his license but permitted reapplication after two years.
Issues
| Issue | Callam's Argument | Board/Opposing Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Callam’s false statements and omissions during the admissions process and to the Dept. of Insurance warrant revocation | Misconduct does not justify permanent disbarment; he has shown remorse and cooperated | False statements/omissions demonstrate lack of candor and unfitness for practice; warrant revocation | License revoked (effective immediately) |
| Whether Callam should be permanently precluded from reapplying | He should be allowed to reapply after a rehabilitation period | Board recommended permanent exclusion as appropriate sanction | Court disagreed with permanent bar; allowed reapplication after two years |
| Whether Callam has remediated misconduct sufficient to retain license | Claimed remorse and reform; employment testimony vouched for him | Panel found remediation insufficient; honesty is situational | Remediation not shown now; must reapply and pass full character review |
| Appropriate conditions for any future reapplication | N/A (relief sought: retention or limited sanction) | Require new registration, NCBE background check, full character & fitness review | Reapplication permitted after June 21, 2019 with full vetting |
Key Cases Cited
- In re Dabney, 107 Ohio St.3d 40 (2005) (revocation for nondisclosure after admission but allowed reapplication after review)
- In re Steinhelfer, 142 Ohio St.3d 120 (2015) (disapproval for failure to disclose material adverse information)
- In re Worthy, 136 Ohio St.3d 142 (2013) (applicant disapproved for nondisclosure)
- Sandler v. Ohio, 63 Ohio St.3d 372 (1992) (revocation for admission-process falsehoods but permitted reapplication)
- In re Bagne, 102 Ohio St.3d 182 (2004) (false statements in admissions process reflect on present character and may justify denial)
- In re Panepinto, 84 Ohio St.3d 397 (1999) (omissions and candor issues weigh against admission)
- In re Aboyade, 103 Ohio St.3d 318 (2004) (permanent denial where honesty and integrity intrinsically suspect)
- In re Swendiman, 146 Ohio St.3d 444 (2016) (applicant must prove by clear and convincing evidence requisite character and fitness)