Foreclosure Related Misconduct

From the web page of the Ohio Supreme Court:

The Courtadopted findings by the Board of Commissioners on Grievances &Discipline that Willard violated multiple provisions of the Rules ofProfessional Conduct by partnering with the non-attorney owners of acompany called Foreclosure Alternatives. The company identifiedhomeowners against whom  mortgage foreclosure actions had been filedand contacted them offering to negotiate a settlement with the lenderthat would halt the foreclosure process. Under Willard’s arrangementwith Foreclosure Alternatives, when a homeowner responded to thecompany’s solicitation, the company would forward a power of attorneysigned by the client and information about the foreclosure action toWillard, who would prepare and file an answer to the lender’sforeclosure complaint without meeting or speaking with the homeownerfor a flat fee of $150 that he received from Foreclosure Alternatives.All negotiations with the lender and virtually all subsequentinformation and advice  provided  to homeowners about their cases wasprovided by the company’s non-attorney employees.

TheCourt agreed with the board’s findings that in collaborating with thenon-attorney owners of Foreclosure Alternatives in at least 28 cases,Willard violated the state attorney discipline rules that prohibitrequesting a third party to promote or recommend an attorney’sprofessional services; aiding a non-lawyer in the unauthorized practiceof law; forming a partnership with a non-attorney and sharing legalfees with a non-attorney.  The Court also found that Willard was guiltyof two additional rule violations that were dismissed by the board:handling a legal matter without adequate preparation and failing topursue the lawful objectives of a client.

Writing for a 4-3majority of the Court, Chief Justice Thomas J. Moyer found  that anactual suspension from practice, rather than a fully stayed suspensionas recommended by the board, was appropriate because Willard’sill-prepared representation and relegation of legal work to non-lawyersexposed vulnerable clients to an increased possibility of losing theirhomes. He also cited as an aggravating factor one instance  in whichWillard admitted accepting a fee despite knowing that a defaultjudgment had already been entered against the homeowner and there wasnothing that could be done to prevent foreclosure. 

ChiefJustice Moyer’s opinion was joined by Justices Evelyn LundbergStratton, Maureen O’Connor and Robert R. Cupp. Justices Paul E.Pfeifer, Terrence O’Donnell and Judith Ann Lanzinger dissented, statingthat they would impose a one-year license suspension with all 12 monthsstayed on conditions.

The opinion is linked here. (Mike Frisch)