Ohio State Bar Ass'n v. Hart, 86

• Decision Date: 17 May 1978
• Docket Number: No. 86,86
• Parties: , 8 O.O.3d 229 OHIO STATE BAR ASSOCIATION v. HART. D. D.
• Court: Ohio Supreme Court

Page 257

54 Ohio St.2d 257

375 N.E.2d 1246, 8 O.O.3d 229

OHIO STATE BAR ASSOCIATION v. HART.

D. D. No. 86.

Supreme Court of Ohio.

May 17, 1978.

On March 10, 1966, an information was filed against respondent, Charles E. Hart, Jr., in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Ohio, Western Division, charging that Hart "did willfully and knowingly fail to make and file" federal income tax returns for the calendar years of 1960, 1961 and 1962, in violation of Section 7203, Title 26, U.S.Code. Upon entering a plea of nolo contendere Hart was sentenced to two years of imprisonment and was fined $2,000. The prison sentence was suspended and Hart was placed on probation.

Thereafter, relator, the Ohio State Bar Association, filed a complaint against respondent, charging him with misconduct as an attorney at law. Specifically, respondent was charged with violation of Canons 29 and 32 of the Canons of Professional Ethics, then in effect.

At that time the Board of Commissioners on Grievances and Discipline (the board) recommended that respondent be suspended for an indefinite period from the practice of law. This court reviewed the matter, and on June 26, 1968, confirmed the recommendation of the board. (Ohio State Bar Assn. v. Hart (1968), 15 Ohio St.2d 97, 238 N.E.2d 560.)

On July 19, 1977, respondent filed a petition for reinstatement to the practice of law. A hearing was held on the petition, with respondent present and represented by counsel and relator appearing by counsel to oppose the reinstatement of respondent. On January 9, 1978, the board filed its report with this court, wherein it was recommended that Hart's petition for reinstatement to the practice of law be denied.

The matter is now before this court for consideration of the report of the board and the respondent's objections to its findings of fact and recommendation.

Albert L. Bell, Columbus, Frank D. DeFrancis, Dayton, William L. Clark and John R. Welch, Columbus, for relator.

Peter W. Swenty, Cincinnati, for respondent.

PER CURIAM.

Gov.R. V(25) sets forth the burden of proof to be borne by an individual seeking reinstatement to the bar, and provides, in pertinent part, as follows:

"Requisites for Reinstatement. No person shall be reinstated unless he has established by clear and convincing evidence that he possesses all of the qualifications, mental, educational and moral, which would have been a requirement of an applicant for admission to the Bar of Ohio at the time of his original admission, and that he is now a proper person to be readmitted to the Bar of Ohio, notwithstanding the previous disciplinary action taken against the Petitioner. In such case the order of reinstatement may be conditioned upon the Petitioner's subsequently taking and passing a regular bar examination of this Court and thereafter taking the prescribed oath of office."

At the hearing on the petition for reinstatement relator presented evidence relative to three legal matters in which respondent had been involved. In two of these instances respondent had been retained, prior to the date of his suspension, as attorney for certain decedents' estates. Although he came into possession of various sums of money in his capacity as attorney for the respective estates, the evidence presented by relator revealed that respondent failed to make distribution to the appropriate heirs and, in addition, failed to deposit these funds in identifiable bank accounts, as required by DR 9-102 of the Code of Professional Responsibility. In the third instance respondent was employed as the closing agent in a real estate transaction which occurred several months after respondent's suspension from the practice of law. The evidence adduced at the hearing before the board shows that Hart retained possession of a major portion of the purchase price for approximately 16 months before paying said sum to the company which held...