|
|
| 2007 | 2006 | 2005 | 2004 | 2003 | 2002 | 2001 | 2000 | Search | Upcoming cases |
Public Information Home
Twinsburg Attorney Receives One-Year Suspension
2006-1575. Akron Bar Assn. v. Paulson, 2006-Ohio-6678.
On Certified Report by the Board of Commissioners on Grievances and Discipline, No. 05-099. Steven Lewis Paulson, Attorney Registration No. 0030044, is suspended from the practice of law in Ohio for one year, such suspension to commence at the conclusion of respondent's current suspension.
Moyer, C.J., Resnick, Pfeifer, Lundberg Stratton and Lanzinger, JJ., concur.
O'Connor and O'Donnell, JJ., concur in part and dissent in part.
Opinion: http://www.supremecourtofohio.gov/rod/newpdf/0/2006/2006-Ohio-6678.pdf
(Dec. 26, 2006) In a 5-2 per curiam decision, the Supreme Court of Ohio has suspended the law license of attorney Steven Lewis Paulson of Twinsburg for one year for three counts of professional misconduct, including neglecting the case of a group of clients who were pursing a class-action lawsuit against their employer. The suspension will commence following the completion of a two-year suspension Paulson is currently serving for prior disciplinary violations.
In the fall of 2003, Ramona Bobo apparently received a “right-to-sue” letter from the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission for claims of racial discrimination and sexual harassment on the job, giving her a 90-day window to file suit. Bobo and five coworkers contacted Paulson, who told them he believed they had viable claims that could be brought as a class action. He asked for $1,500 to take the case and the clients collectively paid him a total of $1,700.
Paulson subsequently told the clients that he had forwarded a letter to their employer advising the company of their claims and demanding a response, however he ultimately failed to file suit on their behalf within the specified time limit. He also failed to report back to the clients or respond to their repeated attempts to communicate with him.
In June 2004, the clients filed a grievance with the Cleveland Bar Association about Paulson's neglect and also filed suit in Cuyahoga Falls Municipal Court to recover their retainer. Paulson failed to appear in response to the civil complaint, and some of the clients recovered their shares of the legal fees as a result of a court order.
In January 2005, the Cleveland Bar Association transferred Paulson's case to the Akron Bar Association for further investigation. Paulson failed to respond to repeated attempts by the bar to contact him regarding the client grievance, and the Board of Commissioners on Grievances & Discipline initiated default proceedings against Paulson on three counts of professional misconduct.
The disciplinary board adopted findings of a master commissioner that Paulson's conduct violated the state attorney discipline rules that prohibit neglect of an entrusted legal matter and intentional failure to carry out a contract of professional employment, and also found a violation of the state bar governance rule requiring all attorneys to cooperate in disciplinary investigations.
In recommending a sanction the board found as aggravating factors that Paulson's license has been under suspension since Dec. 2, 2005 for failing to register with the Supreme Court and pay the applicable biennial registration fees. In addition, the board determined that Paulson had not cooperated during the disciplinary process, had harmed his clients by abandoning their cases, and had made no restitution. The board found no evidence of mitigating factors.
The Court agreed with the board's findings and also considered the additional aggravating factor that Paulson was suspended by the Court on Nov. 29, 2006 for two years for failing in 2003 to properly pursue another client's case and having ignored the ensuing disciplinary proceedings. The Court adopted the board's recommendation of a one-year suspension of Paulson's law license to commence following the completion of his current two-year suspension. The Court also ordered that before Paulson can be reinstated, he must make restitution to his clients.
The majority opinion was joined by Chief Justice Thomas J. Moyer and Justices Alice Robie Resnick, Paul E. Pfeifer, Evelyn Lundberg Stratton and Judith Ann Lanzinger.
Justice Terrence O'Donnell concurred with the findings of fact, but dissented from the majority's choice of a sanction for Paulson's misconduct. “As noted in the majority opinion, respondent's license to practice has been under suspension since December 2, 2005; in this case he failed to cooperate with the disciplinary process, harmed his clients, and failed to pay restitution. I would therefore impose an indefinite suspension in this case,” Justice O'Donnell wrote. Justice O'Donnell's dissent was joined by Justice Maureen O'Connor.
Contacts
Rhonda Davis, 330.762.9700, for the
Akron Bar Association.
No current contact information available for Steven L. Paulson.
Please note: Opinion summaries are prepared by the Office of Public Information for the general public and news media. Opinion summaries are not prepared for every opinion released by the Court, but only for those cases considered noteworthy or of great public interest. Opinion summaries are not to be considered as official headnotes or syllabi of Court opinions. The full text of this and other Court opinions from 1992 to the present are available online from the Reporter of Decisions: http://www.supremecourtofohio.gov/ROD/newpdf/. In the Full Text search box, enter the eight-digit case number at the top of this summary and click "Submit."