From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Akron Bar Assn. v. Johnstone

Supreme Court of Ohio
Jun 28, 1978
377 N.E.2d 790 (Ohio 1978)

Opinion

D.D. No. 78-4

Decided June 28, 1978.

Attorneys at law — Misconduct — Public reprimand — Acts warranting.

ON CERTIFIED REPORT by the Board of Commissioners on Grievances and Discipline.

Robert H. Johnstone, respondent, was admitted to the practice of law in Ohio in 1959.

The evidence in support of Count One of the complaint filed with the Board of Commissioners on Grievances and Discipline by the Akron Bar Association, relator, shows that respondent was retained by William Brown to handle a Workmen's Compensation claim because Brown was not satisfied with the work done by his previous attorney. Brown signed a from authorizing respondent to represent him before the Industrial Commission. Respondent sought and obtained an award for disability and for medical costs for an operation. On reconsideration that award was vacated and Brown was denied temporary-total disability and the costs of an operation. No appeal was taken by respondent from that order. A later order as to the extent of Brown's temporary-partial disability was appealed, without success, by respondent. No further action was taken by respondent in the case from 1964 to 1977, at which time respondent sought to have the case file transferred from Columbus to Akron for the purpose of determining whether a ten year statute of limitations had run. It appeared the statute had run at that time.

Respondent stated that he entered the case only to attempt to obtain temporary-total disability and the costs of an operation. He testified that he did not appeal the order denying the award because the evidence did not support temporary-total disability and because Brown did not want an operation. At that point in time respondent stated that his part of the case was completed and he felt that further proceedings were to be handled by Brown's previous counsel.

The board's finding that respondent, at that time, failed to notify Brown or his previous counsel that he was, in effect, withdrawing from the case is uncontroverted.

The board concluded that respondent violated DR2-110(A)(2) by withdrawing from employment without taking reasonable steps to protect the rights of his client.

The uncontroverted evidence in support of Count Two of the complaint shows that respondent was retained to represent certain plaintiffs in an action for bodily injury sustained in a motor vehicle accident. Respondent filed a complaint in December 1969, and answers were filed within rule. Several unsuccessful attempts to take depositions were subsequently made. In September 1970, the case was dismissed by the court for want of prosecution. Notice of the dismissal was published in the daily Akron legal newspaper but was not personally given to respondent. In October 1975, respondent's motion to have the case reinstated was granted. In December 1976, the case was dismissed on defendants' motion on the ground that respondent's motion to reinstate the case was not filed within rule and should not have been granted. Further action on behalf of the adult plaintiffs was barred by the statute of limitations. Respondent later filed an action on behalf of the remaining plaintiff who was a minor, but that action was also dismissed.

The board found that respondent violated DR6-101(a)(3) by neglecting a legal matter entrusted to him.

On April 26, 1978, the board certified to this court its recommendation that respondent be given a public reprimand.

On May 15, 1978, respondent filed his objections to the findings and recommendation of the board with this court.

Mr. John R. Barrett, Mr. Paul K. Christoff, and Mr. Don R. Miller, for relator.

Mr. David L. Headley, for respondent.


Upon examination of the testimony taken before the board, the findings of the Board of Commissioners on Grievances and Discipline and the brief of respondent, we concur with the board's finding that respondent violated DR2-110(A)(2) and DR6-101(A)(3) of the Code of Professional Responsibility.

We confirm the recommendation of the board that respondent, Robert H. Johnstone, be publicly reprimanded. It is so ordered.

Judgment accordingly.

O'NEILL, C.J., HERBERT, CELEBREZZE, W. BROWN, P. BROWN, SWEENEY and LOCHER, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Akron Bar Assn. v. Johnstone

Supreme Court of Ohio
Jun 28, 1978
377 N.E.2d 790 (Ohio 1978)
Case details for

Akron Bar Assn. v. Johnstone

Case Details

Full title:AKRON BAR ASSOCIATION v. JOHNSTONE

Court:Supreme Court of Ohio

Date published: Jun 28, 1978

Citations

377 N.E.2d 790 (Ohio 1978)
377 N.E.2d 790

Citing Cases

Brown v. Johnstone

The reprimand was based on Johnstone's failure to notify Brown or his previous counsel that he was, in…