Opinion
No. 89-2167
Submitted February 13, 1990 —
Decided April 11, 1990.
Attorneys at law — Misconduct — Public reprimand — Neglecting an entrusted legal matter — Failing to initiate proceedings to modify certain provisions in a divorce decree.
ON CERTIFIED REPORT by the Board of Commissioners on Grievances and Discipline of the Supreme Court, No. 89-28.
In a complaint filed June 20, 1989, relator, Dayton Bar Association, charged that respondent, Kathy L. Ellison, had violated, inter alia, DR 6-101(A)(3) (neglecting an entrusted legal matter) and 7-101(A)(3) (causing client damage or prejudice). The matter was heard by a panel of the Board of Commissioners on Grievances and Discipline of the Supreme Court on October 20, 1989. Respondent stipulated to many of the facts underlying the complaint at the hearing.
According to the record, Edith Buffalo asked respondent in November 1986 to represent her in proceedings to modify certain provisions in her 1983 divorce decree. Respondent accepted the case and Buffalo paid respondent a $75 retainer. During the next eight months, Buffalo contacted respondent regularly and responded promptly whenever respondent requested information.
On three different occasions, respondent represented to Buffalo that a first hearing had been scheduled in her case. Before each one, however, respondent told Buffalo that the hearing had been continued. Buffalo later learned from the court that the hearings had been cancelled because respondent had not filed and served the papers necessary for them to go forward. This and respondent's general lack of progress in her case caused Buffalo to retain other counsel in or around July 1987 and, within the next three months, the matter was resolved.
Based on the foregoing, the panel found that respondent had violated DR 6-101(A)(3) and 7-101(A)(3). In making its recommendation, the panel considered respondent's admission that she was dilatory in representing Buffalo, as well as the expenses Buffalo incurred because of this inaction. However, the panel also considered that respondent had contacted Buffalo's ex-husband with the hope of reaching an agreement in the matter and, thus, had not entirely ignored it. The panel therefore recommended that respondent be publicly reprimanded for her misconduct. The board adopted the panel's findings and its recommendation.
Charles Geidner, for relator.
Kathy L. Ellison, pro se.
We agree with the board's findings of misconduct and its recommendation. Respondent is therefore publicly reprimanded for having violated DR 6-101(A)(3) and 7-101(A)(3). Costs taxed to respondent.
Judgment accordingly.
MOYER, C.J., SWEENEY, HOLMES, DOUGLAS, WRIGHT, H. BROWN and RESNICK, JJ., concur.