Opinion
No. 84-19
Decided April 24, 1985.
Attorneys at law — Misconduct — Permanent disbarment — Passing bad checks, forgery, theft.
ON CERTIFIED REPORT by the Board of Commissioners on Grievances and Discipline of the Bar.
This matter came on for hearing before a three-member panel of the Board of Commissioners on Grievances and Discipline of the Bar on June 15, 1984, in the offices of the Disciplinary Counsel in Columbus, Ohio, upon a complaint filed by the Disciplinary Counsel against respondent, Thomas E. Klunk, charging him with violations of the Code of Professional Responsibility.
Respondent filed an answer to the original complaint; however, he failed to reply to the amended complaint subsequently filed by relator. The chairman of the panel directed that the hearing proceed as a private hearing in the absence of any waiver or appearance by respondent. The record reflects that respondent was properly served with notice of the hearing as required by the Supreme Court Rules for the Government of the Bar of Ohio. Respondent did not appear.
Respondent was admitted to the practice of law in the state of Ohio on April 22, 1964. On March 27, 1981, respondent was indicted by the Franklin County Grand Jury on four counts of passing bad checks in violation of R.C. 2913.11, two counts of forgery in violation of R.C. 2913.31, and one count of theft in violation of R.C. 2913.02. On November 17, 1982, respondent entered a no contest plea to the bad check counts and the count of theft. The counts of forgery were dismissed, and respondent was placed on probation.
On June 10, 1981, respondent was indicted by the Franklin County Grand Jury on two counts of theft in violation of R.C. 2913.02 and two counts of forgery in violation of R.C. 2913.31. On November 17, 1982, respondent entered a no contest plea to the forgery indictment, and one forgery count and two theft counts were dismissed. Respondent was placed on probation on the charges arising out of these violations.
On January 6, 1983, respondent was indicted by the Cuyahoga County Grand Jury for grand theft and, on November 18, 1983, pled guilty to attempted grand theft of a motor vehicle in violation of R.C. 2923.02. Respondent was sentenced to the Columbus Correctional Facility for six months.
Respondent was further charged with undertaking the representation of Larry B. Slagle for the filing of a Chapter 13 bankruptcy petition. Slagle testified at the hearing that he had paid respondent the sum of $242 for the preparation and filing of the papers. Respondent failed to return to Slagle the money paid to him or to complete the work which had been requested. It appears from the testimony of Slagle that respondent, aware of his restriction in practicing law, was undertaking merely to assist Slagle complete the forms and no clear indication of lawyer-client relationship was established by the facts presented by Slagle.
Respondent is charged with violation of the following Disciplinary Rules: DR 1-102(A)(1), a lawyer shall not violate a Disciplinary Rule; 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; 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 of Commissioners on Grievances and Discipline concluded from the evidence submitted by relator, and the testimony of Slagle, that respondent did violate DR 1-102(A)(1), (3), (4) and (6). Accordingly, Disciplinary Counsel recommended the permanent disbarment of respondent.
Angelo J. Gagliardo, disciplinary counsel, and Carl J. Corletzi, for relator.
Upon a review of the record herein, it is the determination of the court that respondent has violated DR 1-102(A)(1), DR 1-102(A)(3), DR 1-102(A)(4) and DR 1-102(A)(6), and we hereby accept the recommendation of the board of commissioners.
Therefore, it is the order of the court that respondent be permanently disbarred from the practice of law in the state of Ohio. The court further orders that the costs of these proceedings shall be taxed to respondent.
Judgment accordingly.
CELEBREZZE, C.J., SWEENEY, LOCHER, HOLMES, C. BROWN, DOUGLAS and WRIGHT, JJ., concur.