Mahoning County Bar Association v. Gerchak
144 Ohio St. 3d 138
| Ohio | 2015Background
- David J. Gerchak, admitted in 1998, faced a disciplinary complaint alleging mishandling of client funds and inadequate fee communication in his representation of Jeff Blanche.
- Blanche paid Gerchak $750 in 2008 to pursue a gubernatorial pardon; Gerchak did not deposit that payment into a client trust account and Blanche never returned fingerprint paperwork.
- In 2012 Blanche hired Gerchak for an OVI matter; additional payments brought total fees paid to $1,400, none of which were deposited into a client trust account.
- Gerchak had no written fee agreement for the OVI matter and provided no monthly accounting of time, disbursements, or remaining funds.
- The parties stipulated that Gerchak violated Prof.Cond.R. 1.5(b), 1.15(a), and 1.15(c); he acknowledged wrongdoing, repaid fees, and cooperated with proceedings.
- The Board adopted a panel recommendation of a two-year suspension, fully stayed on conditions (two-year probation, monitoring attorney, 3 hours annual CLE in law-office management, no further misconduct); the Supreme Court of Ohio adopted the recommendation.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Gerchak failed to communicate the basis/rate of his fee (Prof.Cond.R. 1.5(b)) | Mahoning Cty. Bar Assn.: Gerchak did not give a written fee agreement or timely communicate fee basis for the OVI representation | Gerchak emphasized mitigation (cooperation, repayment, no dishonest motive) but did not dispute lack of written communication | Court held Gerchak violated Prof.Cond.R. 1.5(b) |
| Whether Gerchak failed to keep client property separate and in a client trust account (Prof.Cond.R. 1.15(a)) | Relator: Fees paid by Blanche were not deposited into a client trust account, amounting to trust-account improprieties | Gerchak offered restitution and mitigation but admitted not maintaining deposits in a trust account | Court held Gerchak violated Prof.Cond.R. 1.15(a) |
| Whether Gerchak failed to deposit prepaid legal fees into a client trust account (Prof.Cond.R. 1.15(c)) | Relator: Advance payments and fees were not placed in trust as required | Gerchak argued mitigating circumstances and that fees were later repaid/reconciled | Court held Gerchak violated Prof.Cond.R. 1.15(c) |
| Appropriate sanction for the misconduct | Relator recommended a stayed suspension with conditions consistent with similar cases | Gerchak and parties jointly recommended a two-year suspension fully stayed on conditions, citing mitigating factors | Court imposed a two-year suspension, fully stayed on conditions (two-year probation with monitoring, CLE, no further misconduct); costs taxed to Gerchak |
Key Cases Cited
- Akron Bar Assn. v. Tomer, 138 Ohio St.3d 302 (attorney suspended two years, stayed on conditions, for trust-account and other violations)
- Disciplinary Counsel v. Dockry, 133 Ohio St.3d 527 (one-year suspension, stayed on conditions, for multiple client-trust-account violations with mitigating factors)
- Disciplinary Counsel v. Doellman, 127 Ohio St.3d 411 (one-year suspension, stayed on conditions, for failure to maintain client trust account and commingling)