Disciplinary Counsel v. Givens
| Decision Date | 31 August 2005 |
| Docket Number | No. 2004-2175.,2004-2175. |
| Citation | 106 Ohio St.3d 144,832 N.E.2d 1200,2005 Ohio 4104 |
| Parties | DISCIPLINARY COUNSEL v. GIVENS. |
| Court | Ohio Supreme Court |
Jonathan Coughlan, Disciplinary Counsel, and Robert R. Berger, Assistant Disciplinary Counsel, for relator.
Greg P. Givens, pro se.
{¶ 1} On December 4, 2002, relator, Disciplinary Counsel, charged that respondent, Greg P. Givens, last known address in Shadyside, Ohio, had engaged in the unauthorized practice of law. Respondent was served the complaint but did not answer, and relator moved for default. See Gov.Bar R. VII(7)(B). The Board on the Unauthorized Practice of law granted the motion, making findings of fact, conclusions of law, and a recommendation.
{¶ 2} Respondent represents that he is the director, chief executive officer, and statutory agent for United Charities/Adventure Novelty Association, Inc. ("Adventure Novelty") and that Adventure Novelty is a nonprofit organization. In evidence submitted to substantiate the motion for default, Adventure Novelty is also referred to as Adventure Novelty, Ohio Valley Chapter; Adventure Novelty/Volunteer Alliance, Ohio Valley Chapter; and Ohio Valley Chapter, Adventure Novelty organized as Volunteer Alliance. Respondent has never been admitted to practice, granted active status, or certified to practice law in Ohio pursuant to Gov.Bar R. I (admission to practice), II (internship), VI (active status), IX (temporary certification), or XI (foreign legal consultants).
{¶ 3} In June 2002, the Ohio Attorney General filed a complaint on behalf of the Ohio Department of Commerce against Adventure Novelty in the county court of Belmont County, Ohio, seeking to enforce the state minimum-wage law and to recover $164.15 in underpaid wages. On July 3, 2002, respondent filed two motions to dismiss the complaint, purportedly acting on Adventure Novelty's behalf as "Attorney or Agent for Defendant." On August 5, 2002, the Belmont County Court rejected the motion to dismiss because it had been filed by a nonlawyer.
{¶ 4} On June 19, 2002, respondent filed a "Complaint for Preliminary Restraining Order and for Temporary and Permanent Injunction" in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Ohio on behalf of Adventure Novelty and against the Ohio Department of Commerce. Respondent signed the complaint as "Trial Attorney." Respondent also filed that day an application to proceed in forma pauperis and a motion to appear pro hac vice on Adventure Novelty's behalf. The district court immediately denied these motions because respondent had not identified himself as an attorney. The court also dismissed the claim for injunctive relief for lack of jurisdiction. On July 5, 2002, the court entered judgment against Adventure Novelty.
{¶ 5} The board found that respondent had engaged in the unauthorized practice of law in Ohio and recommended that we enjoin respondent from future attempts to represent others in court. We adopt the board's findings and recommendation.
{¶ 6} Section 2(B)(1)(g), Article IV of the Ohio Constitution confers on this court original jurisdiction over all matters related to the practice of law, including allegations of laypersons practicing law without a license. Moreover, "except to the limited extent necessary for the accomplishment of the federal objectives," none of which are at stake here, we are also authorized to enjoin the unauthorized practice of law before federal courts located in this state. Sperry v. Florida ex rel. Florida Bar (1963), 373 U.S. 379, 402, 83 S.Ct. 1322, 10 L.Ed.2d 428; Mahoning Cty. Bar Assn. v. Harpman (1993), 62 Ohio Misc.2d 573, 575, 608 N.E.2d 872.
{¶ 7} The unauthorized practice of law consists of rendering legal services for another by any person not admitted to practice in Ohio. Gov.Bar R. VII(2)(A); R.C. 4705.01. Thus, only a licensed attorney may file pleadings and other legal papers in court or manage court actions on...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
People v. Shell
... ... Page 167 ... Office of Attorney Regulation Counsel", James C. Coyle, Deputy Regulation Counsel, Denver, Colorado, Attorney for Petitioner ... \xC2" ... This opinion considers the Presiding Disciplinary Judge's recommendation that we hold Respondent Suzanne Shell in contempt and fine her $6,000 for ... Other states have acted similarly. See, e.g., Disciplinary Counsel v. Givens, 106 Ohio St.3d 144, 832 N.E.2d 1200, 1201 (2005) ("[W]e are also authorized to enjoin the ... ...
-
Travis Lanier Williams Revocable Trust v. PNC Bank
... ... Court of Common Pleas, 156 Ohio St.3d 346, 2019-Ohio-901, 126 N.E.3d 1113, 5, citing Disciplinary Counsel v. Givens, 106 Ohio St.3d 144, 2005-Ohio-4104, 832 N.E.2d 1200, 7. This includes trustees ... ...
-
Cleveland Bar Assn. v. Pearlman
... ... {¶ 34} As we recently stated in Disciplinary Counsel v. Givens, 106 Ohio St.3d 144, 2005-Ohio-4104, ___ N.E.2d ___: ... {¶ 35} ... ...
-
In re Guardianship Bakhtiar
... ... Saghafi, through counsel, filed a brief in opposition to Presutto's motion to strike his brief in opposition to Presutto's ... and other legal papers in court or manage court actions on another's behalf." Disciplinary Counsel v. Givens , 106 Ohio St.3d 144, 2005-Ohio-4104, 832 N.E.2d 1200, 7. "A court has the ... ...