Opinion
No. 91-2193
Submitted December 11, 1991 —
Decided March 4, 1992.
ON CERTIFIED REPORT by the Board of Commissioners on Grievances and Discipline of the Supreme Court, No. 91-11.
By a complaint filed April 18, 1991, relator, Cincinnati Bar Association, charged respondent, John L. Altekruse, Jr., in four counts, with violations of, inter alia, DR 9-102(B)(3) and (4) (failure to promptly notify a client of the receipt of funds or other properties, or to maintain complete records of all funds or property coming into his possession, or to promptly pay or deliver to the client the funds or property).
A hearing on the complaint was held on September 6, 1991. Stipulations of the parties and testimony established that respondent was first employed by Clemmet Richards ("Richards") in a collection matter for a fee of $1,500. The $45,000 claim against Richards was settled at a negotiated sum of $2,500. Richards sent respondent a series of $500 checks in payment of the settlement. Meanwhile, respondent, through additional negotiation, but without notification to his client, arranged for a settlement of $1,800. Respondent did not account for the additional $700 which Richards paid and which respondent deposited into his trust account. The $700 was returned to Richards after completion of the relator's investigation of the matter.
In November 1988, Richards engaged respondent to handle the sale of Cincinnati real estate owned by Richards' brother who had become incapacitated by a stroke. In connection with the real estate transaction, Richards signed and forwarded a blank check to respondent. Respondent completed the check for $2,000, made it payable to himself and deposited it into his personal account in payment of his services without accounting to or billing Richards therefor. No agreement as to fees was reached, but respondent performed additional services required to dispose of the real estate. He also, as requested, sold, disposed of, or retained the brother's personal property. In addition, friends of the brother raised $500 for his benefit and sent the check to respondent who deposited it into his personal account in payment of his fee without accounting to or billing Richards therefor.
Upon consideration of the pleadings, stipulations, and the evidence, the panel found that respondent failed to maintain complete records of all funds of a client coming into his possession as required by DR 9-102(B)(3), to promptly pay the funds in his possession which the client was entitled to receive as required by DR 9-102(B)(4), and to render appropriate accounts regarding them as required by DR 9-102(B)(3), but that the evidence was insufficient to support any charge of misconduct as alleged in Count Three.
The panel found that respondent's misconduct was the result of carelessness, failure to properly communicate, and a lack of maintaining organized financial records, rather than a matter of commingling funds or dishonest conduct. The panel found further that respondent obtained the results for his clients for which he was hired and that there was no prejudice to the legal position of any client. The panel recommended that respondent be given a public reprimand.
The board of commissioners adopted the findings of fact and recommendation of the panel and recommended that the respondent be publicly reprimanded.
W. Deems Clifton, John G. Slauson and Edwin W. Patterson, for relator.
John H. Burlew, for respondent.
Based upon our review of the record, we agree with the findings of misconduct and recommendation of the board. Respondent, John L. Altekruse, Jr., is hereby publicly reprimanded. Costs taxed to respondent.
Judgment accordingly.
MOYER, C.J., SWEENEY, HOLMES, DOUGLAS, WRIGHT, H. BROWN and RESNICK, JJ., concur.