Opinion
D.D. No. 83-18
Decided January 25, 1984.
Attorneys at law — Misconduct — Indefinite suspension — Deposit of estate funds in personal account — Commingling of funds — Failure to render appropriate accounts and to promptly deliver funds.
ON CERTIFIED REPORT by the Board of Commissioners on Grievances and Discipline of the Bar.
This matter came on for private hearing before the Board of Commissioners on Grievances and Discipline upon the complaint of the Columbus Bar Association, relator herein. The respondent, Robert L. Cohodes, was represented by counsel.
The complaint against respondent alleged violations of Canons 1 and 9, DR 1-102(A)(1), (3), (4), (5), and (6), DR 9-102, DR 9-102(B)(3), and DR 9-102(B)(4) of the Code of Professional Responsibility. The complaint alleged that respondent twice failed to deposit money received by him as attorney for an executrix into a bank account of said estate, but instead deposited the proceeds in his office account and used them for his own purposes. It was also alleged that respondent commingled the funds of his client with personal funds and that he failed to render appropriate accounts. It was further alleged that he failed to promptly deliver to his client funds in his possession which the client was entitled to receive.
The matter was decided on a stipulation of facts and two exhibits offered by respondent. It was stipulated that respondent is a duly licensed attorney authorized to practice law in the state of Ohio.
It was admitted that respondent deposited estate money into his personal account, and that on March 9, 1981, and September 25, 1981, respondent used estate money for his own personal use and for uses which were not for the benefit of the estate. It was further stipulated that on two occasions in August 1981, the administrator of the estate requested from respondent information concerning the estate funds, but respondent failed to respond to these requests and failed to render true and correct accounts of the funds entrusted to him. In April 1982, the respondent made a full and complete accounting, as well as complete restitution plus interest to the estate, and waived any and all fees.
Respondent offered evidence of his emotional distress during the relevant period in mitigation of actions which he concedes would otherwise ordinarily merit indefinite suspension. The evidence consisted of reports of a psychiatrist which detailed stress from marital and financial problems. Respondent concedes that the emotional distress did not amount to a mental illness as defined in R.C. 5122.01(A).
Based on the evidence, the board found that respondent deposited estate funds in his personal account and used said funds for his own use in violation of DR 1-102(A)(1), (3), (4), (5), and (6); that he willfully commingled funds in violation of DR 9-102; that he failed to render appropriate accounts in violation of DR 9-102(B)(3); and that he failed to promptly deliver funds in violation of DR 9-102(B)(4). The board recommended that respondent be indefinitely suspended from the practice of law and that if he were ever to apply for readmission that his mental condition be considered.
Mr. J. Raymond Prohaska and Mr. Ira O. Kane, for relator
Mr. Harold E. Wonnell, for respondent.
After a careful review of the evidence, this court finds that respondent violated DR 1-102(A)(1), (3), (4), (5), and (6), DR 9-102, DR 9-102(B)(3), and DR 9-102(B)(4) of the Code of Professional Responsibility and concurs with the recommendation of the board.
It is the judgment of this court that respondent be indefinitely suspended from the practice of law.
Judgment accordingly.
CELEBREZZE, C.J., W. BROWN, SWEENEY, LOCHER, HOLMES, C. BROWN and J.P. CELEBREZZE, JJ., concur.