Regulation UPL 400 - Guidelines for the Imposition of Civil Penalties(A)General. Each case of unauthorized practice of law involves unique facts and circumstances.(B)Relator. At the hearing and at the end of its case-in-chief, relator shall set forth its position on the imposition of a civil penalty. Relator shall specify the amount of the civil penalty it is requesting and identify the factors, circumstances, and aggravating factors, if any, that warrant imposition of the requested civil penalty.(C)Respondent. At the hearing, if respondent chooses to contest any request for imposition of a civil penalty, evidence that is offered by respondent in mitigation shall be introduced as part of the respondent's case-in-chief.(D)Imposition of penalty. In determining whether to recommend the imposition of a civil penalty, the Board shall consider all relevant facts and circumstances, as well as precedent established by the Supreme Court of Ohio and the Board.(E)Factors considered. In each case where the Board finds by a preponderance of the evidence that respondent has engaged in the unauthorized practice of law, the Board shall discuss in its final report to the Supreme Court any of the factors set forth in Gov. Bar R. VII, Sec. 14(B)(F)Other relevant factors. As part of its analysis of "other relevant factors" pursuant to Gov. Bar R.VII, Sec. 14(B)(5), the Board may consider all of the following: (1) Whether relator has sought imposition of a civil penalty and, if so, the amount sought;(2) Whether the imposition of civil penalties would further the purposes of Gov. Bar R.VII;(3) The following factors in favor of recommending a more severe penalty:(a) Whether respondent has previously engaged in the unauthorized practice of law;(b) Whether respondent has previously been ordered to cease engaging in the unauthorized practice of law;(c) Whether the respondent had been informed before engaging in the unauthorized practice of law that the conduct at issue may constitute an act of the unauthorized practice of law;(d) Whether respondent has benefited from the unauthorized practice of law and, if so, the extent of any such benefit;(e) Whether respondent's unauthorized practice of law included an appearance before a court or other tribunal;(f) Whether respondent's unauthorized practice of law included the preparation of a legal instrument for filing with a court or other governmental entity;(g) Whether the respondent has held the respondent's self out as being admitted to practice law in the State of Ohio, or whether respondent has allowed others to mistakenly believe that he or she was admitted to practice law in the State of Ohio.(4) The following factors in favor of recommending no penalty or a less severe penalty: (a) Whether respondent has ceased engaging in the conduct under review;(b) Whether respondent has admitted or stipulated to the conduct under review;(c) Whether respondent has admitted or stipulated that the conduct under review constitutes the unauthorized practice of law;(d) Whether respondent has agreed or stipulated to the imposition of an injunction against future unauthorized practice of law;(e) Whether respondent's conduct resulted from a motive other than dishonesty or personal benefit;(f) Whether respondent has engaged in a timely good-faith effort to make restitution or to rectify the consequences of the unauthorized practice of law;(g) Whether respondent has had other penalties imposed for the conduct at issue.Amended June 5, 2023, effective 7/1/2023.