The Akron Legal News

New report shows Board of Professional Conduct making headway on caseload

ANNIE YAMSON
Special to the Legal News
Published: February 23, 2017

According to the newly released Ohio Board of Professional Conduct annual report for 2016, last year was the fourth year in the past five years that the board has disposed of more cases than were filed or reopened.

The board opened or reopened 76 cases and made 83 dispositions, leaving 57 active cases at year's end.

The adjudicating arm of the Ohio Supreme Court is primarily responsible for the review of allegations of professional misconduct on the part of lawyers and judges and the issuance of recommendations to the high court regarding appropriate sanctions.

The disposed-of cases included 72 new formal complaints, three of which alleged misconduct by current or former judges or candidates for judicial office.

Two cases were remanded from the Supreme Court for further consideration and three petitions from lawyers seeking reinstatement were referred to the board.

The report also highlights the board's efforts to reduce spending.

Although operations expenditures increased by 0.9 percent in fiscal year 2016 and personnel expenses saw an 11.4 percent rise due to employee benefit costs, the budget increases were largely offset by a 20 percent reduction in other operating costs.

"Since fiscal year 2012, the board has reduced its operating costs by 7.9 percent," the report states.

The board's operations spending for the fiscal year represent 7.6 percent of the total annual expenditures from the Supreme Court Attorney Services Fund.

The board's responsibilities also include issuing advisory opinions that address prospective or hypothetical questions involving application of the Supreme Court Rules for the Government of the Bar and Judiciary of Ohio, the Rules of Professional Conduct and Judicial Conduct and the Attorney Oath of Office.

In 2016, the board issued five new opinions and undertook a project to review and update some older advisory opinions.

Staff identified several prior opinions that needed updating and the board ultimately approved seven revised opinions that replaced nine previously issued advisory opinions.

"The work summarized in this report is a brief glimpse into the service that commissioners and staff have provided the Supreme Court, both in the most recent year and for the past six decades," wrote the director of the board, Richard Dove.

The board also considers petitions from lawyers seeking to be reinstated to the practice of law and is charged with promoting and enhancing compliance with standards of professional ethics.

This year marks the 60th anniversary of the board's creation by the state's high court. It is made up of 28 volunteer commissioners including judges, lawyers and members of the public.

"Ohioans expect judges and lawyers to adhere to the high standards of ethical conduct established by the Supreme Court," Dove told the Supreme Court's news service. "The 2016 annual report reflects the efforts of the Board of Professional Conduct to assist in meeting this expectation and hold accountable those who fail to follow accepted professional ethics requirements."

Notable opinions addressed participation by Ohio lawyers in online lawyer referral services, the ethical implications for lawyers under Ohio's new medical marijuana law and the use of client testimonials in attorney advertisements.

In March, the board also issued the first in a series of ethics guides intended to address issues of concern "to a broad segment of the Ohio bench and bar."

"The board's ethics guides will compile in a single document standards set forth in professional conduct rules, advice from advisory opinions and best practices relative to the practice of law," the report states.

The initial ethics guide concerned client file retention and is available on the board's website.

Future guides will tackle subjects like succession planning for small firms and issues facing lawyers leaving practice to become a judge or magistrate.

"The accomplishments outlined in this annual report are a credit to the commissioners and staff who are privileged to serve the Supreme Court, the legal profession and the public," the report concludes. "The members and staff of the Board of Professional Conduct are ever mindful of the responsibility delegated by the Supreme Court and strive to approach that responsibility with a commensurate degree of diligence, fairness and compassion."

[Back]