Opinion
No. 75-1
Decided May 14, 1975.
Attorneys at law — Misconduct — Acts warranting suspension.
ON CERTIFIED REPORT by the Board of Commissioners on Grievances and Discipline.
On June 18, 1973, an information was filed in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Ohio, Western Division, charging in two counts that respondent, Charles J. Tekulve, willfully failed to file federal income tax returns for 1968 and 1969, in violation of Section 7203, Title 26, U.S. Code. The counts of the information alleged that in 1968, respondent had a gross income of $47,728.19, and in 1969, a gross income of $55,024.41.
On the same date, June 18, 1973, respondent pleaded nolo contendere to the above charges, and was convicted of the offense charged in Count II, willful failure to file a federal income tax return for the year 1969. The imposition of sentence was suspended, and respondent was placed on probation for three years.
Subsequent to the conviction, the relator, Ohio State Bar Association, instituted this proceeding before the Board of Commissioners on Grievances and Discipline. Respondent testified before the hearing panel of the board. He indicated his financial problems prior to 1968 had resulted from bad investments in distressed real estate in downtown Cincinnati. As early as 1966, he had gotten behind in the payment of federal income taxes, and collection authorities began to attach his accounts. In reference to his failure to file in 1968 and 1969, respondent stated to the hearing panel that "I gambled and lost."
Upon the evidence, the board recommended that respondent be suspended indefinitely from the practice of law.
Mr. Francis D. DeFrancis, Mr. Albert L. Bell, Mr. John R. Welch and Mr. John L. Beckley, for relator.
Messrs. Cors. Hair Hartsock and Mr. Louis J. Schneider, Jr., for respondent.
In Cleveland Bar Assn. v. Stein (1972), 29 Ohio St.2d 77, 278 N.E.2d 670, this court recognized the need for consistency in the imposition of discipline in cases of willful failure by an attorney to file an income tax return. We therefore rejected the recommendation of the Board of Commissioners on Grievances and Discipline that a public reprimand issue, and imposed the discipline of indefinite suspension, stating, at page 81:
"One of the fundamental tenets of the professional responsibility of a lawyer is that he should maintain a degree of personal and professional integrity that meets the highest standard. The integrity of the profession can be maintained only if the conduct of the individual attorney is above reproach. He should refrain from any illegal conduct. Anything short of this lessens public confidence in the legal profession — because obedience to the law exemplifies respect for the law."
The rule announced in Stein was recently upheld in Columbus Bar Assn. v. Dixon (1974), 40 Ohio St.2d 76, 320 N.E.2d 293.
The case at bar is not distinguishable from Stein or Dixon. By willfully violating the law requiring the filing of income tax returns, respondent has acted in clear disregard of a law which millions of taxpayers obey yearly, and by his conduct has brought disrespect upon the legal profession.
For the foregoing reasons, the report of the Board of Commissioners on Grievances and Discipline is affirmed and respondent is indefinitely suspended from the practice of law.
Judgment accordingly.
O'NEILL, C.J., HERBERT, CORRIGAN, STERN, CELEBREZZE, W. BROWN and P. BROWN, JJ., concur.