Lorain County Bar Association v. Smith, 147 Ohio St. 3d 419

Gerald Morton Smith, admitted 1961, was charged by the Lorain County Bar Association with multiple ethics violations arising from representation of Robert Gonzalez in a serious criminal case.
Gonzalez (via his son) paid Smith $70,000 in two stages ($10k + $15k, then $45k after Smith demanded an additional $50k) for criminal-defense services; no written fee agreement was executed.
Smith never deposited any portion of the $70,000 into a client trust account, failed to provide the required written advisement about "nonrefundable" or "earned on receipt" fees, and failed to maintain required trust-account records and monthly reconciliations.
Gonzalez pleaded guilty to most charges, received an aggregate sentence with early judicial-release eligibility, and later was released; the board found Smith provided effective assistance of counsel.
Smith stipulated that he violated Prof.Cond.R. 1.5(d)(3), 1.15(c), and 1.15(a)(1)–(5); other allegations (e.g., improper promise to influence officials, some claims of excessive fee) were dismissed or not proven.
The Board of Professional Conduct recommended, and the Supreme Court of Ohio adopted, a public reprimand; costs were taxed to Smith.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether Smith violated the rule prohibiting "nonrefundable/earned on receipt" fees without written advisement	Relator: Smith charged/treated fees as nonrefundable/earned on receipt without the required written advisement to client	Smith: Fee described variously (flat fee, retainer, retainer until flat fee set); disputed characterization creates ambiguity	Court adopted stipulation that Smith violated Prof.Cond.R. 1.5(d)(3) and so violated the rule
Whether advance fees were required to be deposited into client trust account	Relator: Advance legal fees must be deposited into client trust account and withdrawn only as earned	Smith: Did not deposit; no persuasive dispute of fact on this point	Court adopted stipulation that Smith violated Prof.Cond.R. 1.15(c)
Whether Smith failed to maintain required trust-account records and reconciliations	Relator: Must keep separate client trust records, bank records, monthly reconciliations	Smith: Did not maintain required records; no effective rebuttal	Court adopted stipulation that Smith violated Prof.Cond.R. 1.15(a)(1)–(5)
Appropriate sanction for admitted violations	Relator: Public reprimand is appropriate given misconduct and precedents	Smith: Mitigating factors (no prior discipline, no dishonest motive, cooperation, reputation) reduce sanction severity	Court publicly reprimanded Smith, citing mitigating factors and similar cases; costs taxed to Smith

Akron Bar Assn. v. White, 136 Ohio St.3d 51 (publicly reprimanding lawyer who deposited retainer in operating account rather than trust account)
Trumbull Cty. Bar Assn. v. Rucker, 134 Ohio St.3d 282 (publicly reprimanding lawyer for failing to maintain client trust accounts and failing to advise client about "nonrefundable" fees)