Opinion
No. 90-402
Submitted April 11, 1990 —
Decided August 1, 1990.
Attorneys at law — Misconduct — Indefinite suspension — Failing to adequately prepare for client's representation — Neglecting an entrusted legal matter — Failure to return clients' records and other papers — Failure to return retainer.
ON CERTIFIED REPORT by the Board of Commissioners on Grievances and Discipline of the Supreme Court, No. 88-50.
By an amended complaint filed June 19, 1989, relator, Akron Bar Association, charged respondent, Thomas L. Jaynes, with six counts of misconduct involving violations of, inter alia, DR 6-101(A)(2) (failing to adequately prepare for client's representation), and 6-101(A)(3) (neglecting an entrusted legal matter). The complaint was served on respondent, but he did not answer. Thereafter, attempts to personally serve respondent with a hearing notice failed, and the notice was served on the Clerk of the Supreme Court pursuant to Gov. Bar R. V(33) and (34).
The matter was heard by a panel of the Board of Commissioners on Grievances and Discipline of the Supreme Court on January 15, 1990. Respondent did not appear. After considering all the evidence, the panel found that respondent did not cooperate in relator's investigation as alleged in Count Four of the complaint; however, it did not identify this as a disciplinary violation. The panel also noted that the sixth count of the complaint had been dismissed.
With respect to the remaining counts, the evidence in support of Count One substantiates that Irvin W. Spencer retained respondent in 1987 to handle the estate of Spencer's father. Spencer paid respondent $750 in retainer fees. Thereafter, respondent failed to complete tasks necessary for administering the estate, and also failed to respond to Spencer's repeated inquiries about the estate. Eventually, Spencer was forced to engage another attorney's services. Respondent was advised of this, but he did not return Spencer's records and other papers until after Spencer's new attorney moved to compel their production. Respondent never returned the retainer Spencer had paid him and never accounted for those fees.
With respect to Count Two, the record shows that Enos J. Hershberger and his wife retained respondent to handle, among other things, the preparation of tax returns for their construction company. The Hershbergers provided respondent with various documents for this purpose. Thereafter, the Hershbergers decided to move from Ohio and asked respondent to return their documents. Despite Mr. Hershberger's repeated requests, however, respondent never returned the papers in his possession.
With respect to Count Three, the record reflects that Josephine Davis and her husband retained respondent around 1985 to defend them against their former attorney's action for fees. Arbitration proceedings in the Cuyahoga County Court of Common Pleas produced a judgment against the Davises for $14,300. Respondent did not advise the Davises of this judgment, and they learned of it only when their former attorney's firm attached their bank accounts. Thereafter, the court denied a motion to vacate the judgment, and respondent appealed.
With respect to Count Five, the record substantiates that Anna Barone retained respondent to represent her in a dispute against her tenant. Barone paid respondent $150 as a retainer fee. Thereafter, Barone made many attempts to contact respondent, but she never spoke to or saw him again. Respondent did nothing for the fees Barone gave him and he never responded to her request for a refund.
Based on the foregoing, the panel found that respondent had violated DR 6-101(A)(2) and (3). It also noted that respondent had been suspended from the practice of law for one year in 1982. See Akron Bar Assn. v. Jaynes (1982), 70 Ohio St.2d 276, 24 O.O. 3d 363, 436 N.E.2d 1359. The panel recommended that respondent be indefinitely suspended from practicing law. The board adopted the panel's findings and its recommendation.
Brouse McDowell Co., L.P.A., Linda B. Kersker, Stanley A. Samad, Emershaw, Mushkat, Ostreicher Schneier, George J. Emershaw and Howard J. Walton, for relator.
Having thoroughly reviewed the record, we concur in the board's findings of misconduct and its recommendation. Therefore, we order that respondent be suspended from the practice of law in Ohio for an indefinite period. Costs taxed to respondent.
Judgment accordingly.
MOYER, C.J., SWEENEY, HOLMES, DOUGLAS, WRIGHT, H. BROWN and RESNICK, JJ., concur.