{¶ 27} In several of the other cases cited by the board, we acknowledged that the attorneys' conduct in accepting payments from clients and then failing to perform any work "is tantamount to theft, for which the presumptive sanction is disbarment." See Cincinnati Bar Assn. v. Fernandez, 155 Ohio St.3d 67, 2018-Ohio-3828, 119 N.E.3d 377, ¶ 15, citing Disciplinary Counsel v. Horan, 123 Ohio St.3d 60, 2009-Ohio-4177, 914 N.E.2d 175, ¶ 22-23; see also Disciplinary Counsel v. Tyack, 107 Ohio St.3d 35, 2005-Ohio-5833, 836 N.E.2d 568, ¶ 30, citing Columbus Bar Assn. v. Moushey, 104 Ohio St.3d 427, 2004-Ohio-6897, 819 N.E.2d 1112, ¶ 16. But we also acknowledged that those cases could be viewed as matters in which the attorneys had neglected entrusted legal matters and compounded their misconduct by failing to cooperate in the ensuing disciplinary investigations-