Opinion
D.D. No. 82-16
Decided June 9, 1982.
Attorneys at law — Misconduct — One year suspension — Acts warranting.
ON CERTIFIED REPORT by the Board of Commissioners on Grievances and Discipline.
On February 5, 1982, a panel of the Board of Commissioners on Grievances and Discipline (the board) convened a hearing in this cause pursuant to a complaint filed by relator, Akron Bar Association, charging that respondent, C. William Goodlet, was guilty of misconduct as attorney for the Estate of Gerald E. Fisher, deceased.
The hearing revealed that respondent was retained by Betty J. Fisher to handle the estate of her late husband, Gerald Fisher. As attorney for the estate, respondent placed the sum of $12,781.58 into a savings account with an automatic withdrawal agreement authorizing transfers to a checking account. Respondent was designated "Personal Representative of the Estate of Gerald E. Fisher" on both accounts and had the power to withdraw sums of money and to write checks.
The hearing further uncovered the following facts: (1) respondent, on 21 occasions, withdrew the total sum of $8,400 from these accounts for his own personal use and (2) the $8,400 exceeded the amount to which respondent was entitled as attorney's fees.
Upon learning of these withdrawals, respondent's partner retained the services of an attorney in Cleveland, Richard Baylog, to close the estate. Baylog notified respondent that he owed the estate $6,740.20. Respondent forwarded Baylog a check in the sum of $6,740.20 drawn on respondent's newly opened escrow account. Respondent's partner attempted to have the check certified but, by reason of a $17.63 charge against the escrow account for printed checks, the bank would not certify the check. Thus, the check was not accepted by Baylog on behalf of the estate. It was established that respondent was unaware of the $17.63 bank charge. Eventually, respondent repaid the $6,740.20 to the estate.
During the investigation of this matter, respondent cooperated with the relator. Respondent indicated that, at the time of his handling of the estate, he was under a great deal of emotional and financial pressure. Nevertheless, respondent did admit there was "no justification" for the manner in which he handled the estate.
Since the repayment of the money, respondent secured employment with Jerry F. Montgomery, an Akron attorney, who stated at the hearing that the respondent handled criminal cases for him in a satisfactory manner.
The board concluded that the foregoing conduct on the part of respondent constituted a violation of DR 1-102(A)(4) and (6) and DR 9-102(A)(2) of the Code of Professional Responsibility. Pursuant to Gov. R. V, the board recommended that respondent be given a one year suspension from the practice of law.
Mr. George A. Clark, Timothy J. Ochsenhert and Mr. Kevin Sanislo, for relator.
Mr. Charles E. Grisi and Mr. Joseph P. Wheeler, for respondent.
One of the fundamental tenents of the professional responsibility of a lawyer is that he or she "* * * should maintain a degree of personal and professional integrity that meets the highest standard. The integrity of the profession can be maintained only if the conduct of the individual attorney is above reproach. * * *" Cleveland Bar Assn. v. Stein (1972), 29 Ohio St.2d 77, 81.
As respondent himself has admitted, his actions demonstrate that he was guilty of misconduct in his handling of the estate and that the emotional and financial problems which he encountered are not justification for his conduct.
After a careful examination and review of the entire record in this cause, this court concurs with the findings and conclusions of the board that respondent violated the foregoing Disciplinary Rules.
Accordingly, it is the judgment of this court that respondent be suspended from the practice of law in this state for a period of one year, and it is so ordered.
Judgment accordingly.
CELEBREZZE, C.J., W. BROWN, SWEENEY, LOCHER, HOLMES, C. BROWN and KRUPANSKY, JJ., concur.