Disciplinary Counsel v. Doan
| Decision Date | 15 January 1997 |
| Docket Number | No. 96-1297,96-1297 |
| Citation | 673 N.E.2d 1272,77 Ohio St.3d 236 |
| Parties | OFFICE OF DISCIPLINARY COUNSEL v. DOAN. |
| Court | Ohio Supreme Court |
On July 31, 1995 the Office of Disciplinary Counsel ("relator") filed a complaint charging David William Doan of Cold Spring, Kentucky ("respondent"), with the unauthorized practice of law in Ohio. The parties filed a stipulation with the Board of Commissioners on the Unauthorized Practice of Law of the Supreme Court of Ohio ("board"), agreeing that in February 1992, when respondent was hired as in-house counsel by Blue Chip Title Agency, Inc. of Cincinnati, he represented that he had applied to practice law in Ohio. While employed at Blue Chip, respondent prepared and signed deeds as "attorney at law" and notarized documents indicating that his notary "commission has no expiration date." He also used stationery identifying himself as an "Attorney at Law" with an office in Cincinnati and signed these letters as "David W. Doan, Attorney at Law." In early March 1992, Blue Chip terminated respondent after discovering that although admitted to the bar in Kentucky, he had neither registered for the Ohio bar examination nor asked for admission by reciprocity. In December 1992, respondent was granted permission to resign from the Kentucky Bar Association pursuant to an "indefinite suspension."
The board accepted these stipulations and further found that respondent had not been admitted to active practice, granted active status, or registered to practice in Ohio. It also found that respondent had not qualified as a notary whose commission has no expiration date under R.C. 147.03, since he was neither an attorney nor had he filed an appropriate certificate with the Secretary of State. The board concluded that respondent had engaged in the unauthorized practice of law and recommended that this court issue an order prohibiting him from engaging in the unauthorized practice of law in the future.
Geoffrey Stern, Disciplinary Counsel, and Sally Ann Steuk, Assistant Disciplinary Counsel, for relator.
Joseph G. Carr, Cincinnati, for respondent.
In Land Title Abstract & Trust Co. v. Dworken (1934), 129 Ohio St. 23, 1 O.O. 313, 193 N.E. 650, we made clear that the practice of law embraces the preparation of legal documents on another's behalf, including deeds which convey real property. We adopt the board's findings and conclusion, and further find that respondent had not registered...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Grenga v. Bank One, N.A., 2005 Ohio 4474 (OH 8/26/2005)
...things, that person is not a properly licensed attorney and prepares legal documents on another's behalf. Disciplinary Counsel v. Doan (1997), 77 Ohio St.3d 236, 237, 673 N.E.2d 1272. This may even be true when the person is preparing legal documents on behalf of his or her spouse. See Palm......
-
Gorsha v. Clark
...practice of law in Ohio. (ECF No. 42 at 234). To support this contention, Plaintiffs highlight the Supreme Court of Ohio's decision in Disciplinary Counsel v. Jones where the court declared, "'The practice of law embraces the preparation of legal documents on another's behalf, including dee......
-
Deutsche Bank Nat'l Trust Co. v. Ayers
...the preparation of legal documents on another's behalf, including deeds which convey real property. See Disciplinary Counsel v. Doan , 77 Ohio St.3d 236, 237, 673 N.E.2d 1272 (1997). However, the Supreme Court of Ohio also has exclusive jurisdiction over the practice of law in Ohio, includi......
-
Disciplinary Counsel v. Jones
...the preparation of legal documents on another's behalf, including deeds which convey real property.” Disciplinary Counsel v. Doan, 77 Ohio St.3d 236, 237, 673 N.E.2d 1272 (1997). See also Land Title Abstract & Trust Co. v. Dworken, 129 Ohio St. 23, 193 N.E. 650 (1934). We have consistently ......