Ohio State Bar Ass'n v. Ohralik, No. 76-8

CourtUnited States State Supreme Court of Ohio
Writing for the CourtPER CURIAM; C. WILLIAM O'NEILL, C. J., and HERBERT
Citation357 N.E.2d 1097,48 Ohio St.2d 217
Decision Date15 December 1976
Docket NumberNo. 76-8
Parties, 2 O.O.3d 397 OHIO STATE BAR ASSOCIATION v. OHRALIK. D.D.

Page 217

48 Ohio St.2d 217
357 N.E.2d 1097, 2 O.O.3d 397
OHIO STATE BAR ASSOCIATION

v.
OHRALIK.
D.D. No. 76-8.
Supreme Court of Ohio.
Dec. 15, 1976.

Albert Ohralik, respondent, was admitted to the practice of law in Ohio in March 1948. He is 55 years old and resides in Montville, ohio. His law office is in Cleveland.

Relator, Ohio State Bar Association, filed a complaint with the Board of Commissioners on Grievances and Discipline against Albert Ohralik, alleging that he solicited the personal injury cases of Carol McClintock and Wanda Lou Holbert in violation of DR2-103(A) and DR2-104(A) of the Code of Professional Responsibility.

Most of the material events involved in this complaint occurred on or about February 13, 1974. In the early morning of that day, while at the Montville, Ohio, Post Office, respondent learned from the postmaster's brother that Carol McClintock, of Montville, and Wanda Lou Holbert, of Chardon, had been involved in a serious automobile accident. Neither Carol McClintock nor Wanda Lou Holbert were relatives or former clients of respondent. Both were, if anything, casual acquaintances. Upon learing of the accident, which had occurred on February 2, 1974, respondent telephoned Carol's mother, obtained her consent to visit Carol at the hospital, and, later that day, proceeded to the hospital where Carol was undergoing treatment for the injuries sustained in the accident.

Carol McClintock testified that, until respondent visited her in the hospital on February 13th, she did not know that he was a lawyer. She admitted to a casual acquaintanceship with him, which began with her visits to the

Page 218

Montville Post Office to pick up the family mail, and which was limited to a customary exchange of greetings on such occasions. She also knew that her father had purchased an automobile from reapondent a number of years ago. Disputing this testimony, respondent insisted that Carol must have been aware that he was a practicing lawyer because, among other things, he had been a candiate for a political office and the fact was evident from his campaign literature.

After reviewing with Carol the legal merits of her cause and the need for proper representation, respondent obtained Carol's consent to handle the claim. Leaving the hospital, respondent drove to the home of Carol's parents, where he examined their [357 N.E.2d 1098] automobile liability policy, discussed the law applicable to passenger guests and obtained the address and directions to the home of Wanda Lou Holbert, a passenger in the automobile driven by Carol McClintock.

Wanda Lou was then 18 years of...

To continue reading

Request your trial
3 practice notes
  • Ohralik v. Ohio State Bar Association, No. 76-1650
    • United States
    • United States Supreme Court
    • May 30, 1978
    ...circumstances likely to result in the adverse consequences the State seeks to avert, does not offend the Constitution. Pp. 462-468. 48 Ohio St.2d 217, 357 N.E.2d 1097, affirmed. Eugene Gressman, Chapel Hill, N. C., for appellant. John R. Welch, Columbus, Ohio, for appellee. Mr. Justice POWE......
  • Teichner, In re, No. 49982
    • United States
    • Supreme Court of Illinois
    • January 12, 1979
    ...$900 to represent her in obtaining the eventual settlement of her claim. The Supreme Court of Ohio suspended Ohralik indefinitely (48 Ohio St.2d 217, 357 N.E.2d 1097), and the United States Supreme Court affirmed. In the companion case, however (In re Primus ), the respondent attorney, Edna......
  • State v. Lee, No. 76-28
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Ohio
    • December 15, 1976
    ...rebutted that the continuance was reasonable in both purpose and length, so as to warrant an extension pursuant to R.C. 2945.72(H). [357 N.E.2d 1097] The judgment of the Court of Appeals as to each appellant is Judgment affirmed. C. WILLIAM O'NEILL, C. J., and HERBERT, J. J. P. CORRIGAN, ST......
3 cases
  • Ohralik v. Ohio State Bar Association, No. 76-1650
    • United States
    • United States Supreme Court
    • May 30, 1978
    ...circumstances likely to result in the adverse consequences the State seeks to avert, does not offend the Constitution. Pp. 462-468. 48 Ohio St.2d 217, 357 N.E.2d 1097, affirmed. Eugene Gressman, Chapel Hill, N. C., for appellant. John R. Welch, Columbus, Ohio, for appellee. Mr. Justice POWE......
  • Teichner, In re, No. 49982
    • United States
    • Supreme Court of Illinois
    • January 12, 1979
    ...$900 to represent her in obtaining the eventual settlement of her claim. The Supreme Court of Ohio suspended Ohralik indefinitely (48 Ohio St.2d 217, 357 N.E.2d 1097), and the United States Supreme Court affirmed. In the companion case, however (In re Primus ), the respondent attorney, Edna......
  • State v. Lee, No. 76-28
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Ohio
    • December 15, 1976
    ...rebutted that the continuance was reasonable in both purpose and length, so as to warrant an extension pursuant to R.C. 2945.72(H). [357 N.E.2d 1097] The judgment of the Court of Appeals as to each appellant is Judgment affirmed. C. WILLIAM O'NEILL, C. J., and HERBERT, J. J. P. CORRIGAN, ST......

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT