Opinion
No. 89-2175
Submitted February 14, 1990 —
Decided April 25, 1990.
Attorneys at law — Misconduct — One-year suspension — Conviction of theft of government property — Withdrawal of Social Security funds of deceased aunt that government did not stop sending after her death.
ON CERTIFIED REPORT by the Board of Commissioners on Grievances and Discipline of the Supreme Court, No. 89-38.
In a complaint filed on June 20, 1989, relator, Akron Bar Association, charged that respondent, Eugene L. Oestreicher, had been convicted of theft of government property, a violation of Section 641, Title 18, U.S. Code, and that he had thereby violated DR 1-102(A)(1) (violating a Disciplinary Rule), 1-102(A)(4) (engaging in conduct involving dishonesty, fraud, deceit or misrepresentation), 1-102(A)(5) (engaging in conduct prejudicial to the administration of justice), and 1-102(A)(6) (engaging in conduct that adversely reflects on an attorney's fitness to practice law). The matter was heard by a panel of the Board of Commissioners on Grievances and Discipline of the Supreme Court on October 25, 1989. At the hearing, respondent stipulated to all the complaint's allegations, including the charged misconduct.
According to the record, respondent cared for and helped support his widowed aunt for eleven years before she died. After his aunt's death, respondent, who handled her estate, notified Social Security authorities to stop paying her monthly benefits. However, Social Security checks continued to be placed, by direct deposit, in respondent's and his late aunt's joint bank account. Respondent withdrew $13,980.83 from this account for his own use.
Respondent pled guilty to and was convicted of violating Section 641, Title 18, U.S. Code, a felony, on February 15, 1989. Following his conviction, respondent voluntarily stopped practicing law. On July 19, 1989, he was formally suspended from the practice of law pursuant to Gov. Bar R. V(9)(a)(iii).
Based on the foregoing, the panel found that respondent had violated DR 1-102(A)(1), 1-102(A)(4), and 1-102(A)(5). Before making its recommendation, the panel considered respondent's testimony that he had withdrawn the funds from the joint account due to financial hardship, and that he was in the process of making restitution. The panel was also impressed with the testimony of respondent's law partner and a Summit County common pleas judge, both of whom expressed their high regard for respondent's professional competence and integrity. Thereafter, the panel recommended the sanction suggested by both parties, a one-year suspension commencing on July 19, 1989. The board adopted the panel's findings and its recommendation.
Renner, Kenner, Grieve, Bobak, Taylor Weber, Reese Taylor, Herman Rowland, John F. Herman, Stark Knoll Co., L.P.A., and Richard W. Burke, for relator.
Cook, Davis Briggs and R. David Briggs, for respondent.
Having thoroughly reviewed the record, we agree with the board's findings of misconduct and its recommendation. Accordingly, respondent is hereby suspended from the practice of law in Ohio for one year, this period to have commenced on July 19, 1989. Costs taxed to respondent.
Judgment accordingly.
MOYER, C.J., SWEENEY, HOLMES, DOUGLAS, WRIGHT, H. BROWN and RESNICK, JJ., concur.