Opinion
No. D.D. 83-35
Submitted March 29, 1989 —
Decided June 7, 1989.
Attorneys at law — Misconduct — Public reprimand — Accepting partial payment of fee from non-client.
ON CERTIFIED REPORT by the Board of Commissioners on Grievances and Discipline of the Supreme Court, No. 88-22.
On June 21, 1988, relator, the Stark County Bar Association, filed a complaint against the respondent, Paul E. Paulson, alleging numerous violations of the Disciplinary Rules. However, at the hearing before the hearing panel of the board, the range of the complaint was narrowed to include only alleged violations of DR 7-102(A)(1) (taking action on behalf of a client that serves merely to harass another), DR 7-102(A)(5) (knowingly making a false statement of law or fact) and DR 7-102(A)(8) (knowingly engaging in conduct contrary to a Disciplinary Rule). The facts were stipulated.
Respondent served as legal counsel to Douglas M. Landis in the dissolution of his marriage from Patricia J. Landis in the Court of Common Pleas of Stark County. The petition for dissolution was heard on October 23, 1987. At that hearing, both parties and respondent were present.
The dissolution of marriage was granted. However, the respondent did not file the final papers of dissolution because the $300 bill for his legal services had not been paid. In a letter sent on November 23, 1987, the respondent informed Patricia Landis that no further action would be taken on the dissolution until the bill was paid. At some point after the November 23 letter was sent, Douglas Landis partially paid the respondent so as to bring the remaining amount owed down to $100. Nevertheless, respondent still refused to file the final decree of dissolution until the balance was paid in full.
On February 9, 1988, Patricia Landis paid the balance of $100 to the respondent and the respondent filed the papers shortly thereafter. According to the respondent's testimony, Patricia Landis fully understood that she was paying her husband's bill and not her own. Furthermore, the respondent was aware that he was receiving $100 from a non-client.
The hearing panel concluded that respondent had violated the aforementioned Disciplinary Rules and recommended a public reprimand. In addition, the panel recommended that the respondent be required to return to Patricia Landis the $100 she had paid to him. The board concurred in the panel's findings and recommendation and also recommended that the respondent pay the costs of the proceedings.
William W. Emley, for relator.
Lemuel R. Green, for respondent.
We concur with the board's findings and its recommendation. Respondent is to repay Patricia J. Landis the $100 he received from her and is hereby publicly reprimanded. Costs taxed to respondent.
Judgment accordingly.
MOYER, C.J., SWEENEY, HOLMES, DOUGLAS, WRIGHT, H. BROWN and RESNICK, JJ., concur.