From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Bar Ass'n v. Litt

Supreme Court of Ohio
Jun 1, 1983
449 N.E.2d 429 (Ohio 1983)

Opinion

D.D. No. 82-36

Decided June 1, 1983.

Attorneys at law — Misconduct — One-year suspension — Willful failure to file federal income tax returns — Section 7203, Title 26, U.S. Code.

ON CERTIFIED REPORT by the Board of Commissioners on Grievances and Discipline.

Repondent, Arthur M. Litt, was admitted to the practice of law in Ohio in 1956. After being charged by information, respondent pled nolo contendere, on February 11, 1982, to three counts of violating Section 7203, Title 26, U.S. Code, for having failed to file his federal income tax returns for the years 1975, 1976 and 1977. The United States District Court for the Northern District of Ohio found respondent guilty of all three counts, and on each of those counts sentenced him to two years' probation and imposed a $10,000 fine. The probationary terms and the fines were concurrent on all counts. The federal court also ordered respondent to liquidate the fine during the probationary term.

Relator, Bar Association of Greater Cleveland, filed a complaint with the Board of Commissioners on Grievances and Discipline against respondent alleging that "* * * [r]espondent's conduct constitutes violations of the Code of Professional Responsibility, to wit: DR 1-102(A)(3) `A lawyer shall not engage in illegal conduct involving moral turpitude'; DR 1-102(A)(4) `A lawyer shall not engage in conduct involving dishonesty, fraud, deceit or misrepresentation * * * [']; and DR 1-102(A)(6) `A lawyer shall not engage in any other conduct that adversely reflects on his fitness to practice law.'" The board held a hearing and received testimony from "* * * numerous professional and community individuals who cumulatively testified to respondent's reputation for honesty, integrity, forthrightness and total respect." The board found that: (1) "* * * respondent is guilty of violating DR 1-102(A)(3), DR 1-102(A)(4) and DR 1-102(A)(6) of the Code of Professional Responsibility"; and (2) "* * * there are sufficient factors presented in this matter to follow the opinion set forth in Columbus Bar Association v. Wolfe, 70 Ohio St.2d 55 [24 O.O.3d 113] (1982) * * *." The board also expressed the belief that "* * * such penalty of one year suspension is appropriate in this instance as the testimony indicated that no client's interest was affected or prejudiced and that the respondent had paid the back due taxes and penalties before the information was filed."

The board recommended that respondent be suspended from the practice of law for one year.

Mr. Avery S. Friedman, Mr. Creighton E. Miller and Mr. Phillip J. Campanella, for relator.

Messerman Messerman Co., L.P.A., and Mr. Gerald A. Messerman, for respondent.


Respondent was found guilty of violating Section 7203, Title 26, U.S. Code. In Columbus Bar Assn. v. Wolfe (1982), 70 Ohio St.2d 55 [24 O.O.3d 113], Cincinnati Bar Assn. v. Mittendorf (1983), 4 Ohio St.3d 123, and Ohio State Bar Assn. v. Loha (1983), 4 Ohio St.3d 190, lawyers who had violated Section 7203, Title 26, U.S. Code, were suspended from the practice of law for a period of one year. We reaffirm those holdings today.

Accordingly, we order that respondent be suspended from the practice of law for one year.

Judgment accordingly.

CELEBREZZE, C.J., W. BROWN, SWEENEY, LOCHER, HOLMES, C. BROWN and J.P. CELEBREZZE, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Bar Ass'n v. Litt

Supreme Court of Ohio
Jun 1, 1983
449 N.E.2d 429 (Ohio 1983)
Case details for

Bar Ass'n v. Litt

Case Details

Full title:BAR ASSOCIATION OF GREATER CLEVELAND v. LITT

Court:Supreme Court of Ohio

Date published: Jun 1, 1983

Citations

449 N.E.2d 429 (Ohio 1983)
449 N.E.2d 429

Citing Cases

Disciplinary Counsel v. Large

Toledo Bar Assn. v. Stichter (1985), 17 Ohio St.3d 248, 249, 17 OBR 484, 478 N.E.2d 1322. For that reason, we…

Disciplinary Counsel v. Bowen

Respondent's accomplishments as a practitioner, public servant, and community volunteer have made him a…