Ohio State Bar Assn. v. Bruner, 2012 Ohio 4326

Bruner, an Ohio attorney admitted in 1974, faced misconduct charges for neglect, failure to communicate, and charging excessive fees in three client matters.
Relator filed complaint August 15, 2011; an amended complaint followed January 20, 2012.
Consent-to-discipline agreement admitted to neglect (inaccurate filings; untimely appeal) and fee misconduct (excessive fees, no rate disclosure, no time records).
Conduct violated Prof.Cond.R. 1.3, 1.4, and 1.5(a); mitigating factors included lack of prior discipline and cooperative posture.
Panel/Board recommended a two-year suspension, stayed conditioned on restitution to three clients totaling $12,300, payable by July 15, 2012.
Ohio Supreme Court adopted the consent, suspending Bruner for two years, stayed with restitution and a 30-day compliance deadline.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether Bruner violated ethics rules	State Bar: violations of 1.3, 1.4, 1.5(a).	Bruner: admits conduct per consent; no dispute on violations.	Yes; violations established under 1.3, 1.4, 1.5(a).
Appropriateness of discipline	Two-year suspension with conditions warranted by misconduct.	Consent supports agreed discipline; no harsher sanction needed.	Two-year, conditionally stayed suspension appropriate.
restitution as condition of stay	Restitution to clients required to justify stayed suspension.	Agree to restitution terms; payment schedule feasible.	Restitution required: $1,000, $8,500, $2,500; payments due by deadlines.

Columbus Bar Assn. v. Williams, 129 Ohio St.3d 603 (Ohio 2011) (two-year, stayed suspension precedent for failing to file appellate brief)