|
|
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."
In separate disciplinary actions announced today, the Supreme Court of Ohio suspended the licenses of attorneys Henry R. Freeman of Tallmadge and Lawrence M. Maley of Lancaster.
2008-0395. Disciplinary Counsel v. Freeman, Slip Opinion No. 2008-Ohio-3836.
On Certified Report by the Board of Commissioners on Grievances and Discipline, No. 07-023. Henry R. Freeman, Attorney Registration No. 0022713, is suspended from the practice of law in Ohio for one year, with six months stayed on conditions.
Moyer, C.J., and Lundberg Stratton, O'Connor, Lanzinger, and Cupp, JJ., concur.
Pfeifer and O'Donnell, JJ., dissent and would suspend respondent for one year, all stayed.
Opinion: http://www.supremecourtofohio.gov/rod/docs/pdf/0/2008/2008-Ohio-3836.pdf
(Aug. 13, 2008) The Supreme Court of Ohio has suspended the license of Tallmadge attorney Henry R. Freeman for one year, with six months of that term stayed on conditions, for commingling his own personal funds with client funds on deposit in his law office trust account and repeatedly failing to respond to or cooperate with disciplinary authorities investigating that misconduct.
The Court adopted findings by the Board of Commissioners on Grievances & Discipline that, between 2004 and 2006, Freeman violated the state disciplinary rule that requires attorneys to maintain client funds in a separate, dedicated account. The board found that Freeman routinely used his trust account as a checking account to pay personal and office expenses, failed to maintain an appropriate accounting of client funds on deposit in the account, and overdrew the account on 14 occasions.
The Court also found that Freeman’s failures to answer the complaints filed against him or to respond to a series of letters and other communications from the Office of Disciplinary Counsel and the Cleveland Bar Association constituted violations of the Ohio bar governance rule that requires attorneys to cooperate with all disciplinary investigations.
Contacts
Robert Berger, 614.461.0256, for the Office of Disciplinary Counsel.
Henry R. Freeman, pro se: 330.630.0170.
2008-0038. Disciplinary Counsel v. Maley, Slip Opinion No. 2008-Ohio-3923.
On Certified Report by the Board of Commissioners on Grievances and Discipline, No. 06-092. Lawrence M. Maley, Attorney Registration No. 0055448, is suspended from the practice of law in Ohio for 18 months, with six months stayed on conditions.
Moyer, C.J., and Pfeifer, Lundberg Stratton, O'Connor, O'Donnell, Lanzinger, and Cupp, JJ., concur.
Opinion: http://www.supremecourtofohio.gov/rod/docs/pdf/0/2008/2008-Ohio-3923.pdf
(Aug. 13, 2008) The law license of Lancaster attorney Lawrence M. Maley has been suspended for 18 months, with the final six months stayed on conditions, for failing to properly supervise the activities of his secretary, who without his knowledge accepted retainer fees from clients and independently prepared and/or filed legal documents in at least 39 bankruptcy cases over a period of more than a year. The suspension was also based on Maley’s failure to maintain a dedicated client trust account, resulting in the improper commingling of fee advances and other moneys he held in trust for his clients with his own personal and business funds.
The Supreme Court adopted findings by the Board of Commissioners on Grievances & Discipline that Maley’s lax oversight of his employee and failure to maintain proper client accounts enabled the secretary to use his credit card and the court’s online filing software to independently prepare and file bankruptcy petitions bearing Maley’s electronic signature, and to perform other unlicensed legal work for dozens of clients who thought they were obtaining Maley’s professional services. Maley subsequently notified police that the secretary had pocketed client fees totaling more than $25,000 and had used his credit card to make an additional $8,300 in unauthorized purchases or payment for her own benefit.
The Court found that Maley’s acts and omissions violated multiple state attorney discipline rules including those that prohibit conduct prejudicial to the administration of justice, conduct adversely reflecting on an attorney’s fitness to practice, aiding a non-lawyer in the unauthorized practice of law, neglect of entrusted client legal matters and prejudicing or damaging a client in the course of a professional relationship.
Contacts
Robert R. Berger, 614.461.0256, for the Office of Disciplinary Counsel.
William C. Mann, 614.224.4114, for Lawrence Maley.