Restructuring Ohio Bar Discipline

An announcement from the web page of the Ohio Supreme Court:

Ohio’s disciplinary system for lawyers and judges should berestructured to realize more consistency, uniformity and oversight,according to a report released today by a Supreme Court of Ohio taskforce.

The restructuring proposed by the taskforce would decrease the number of certified grievance committees fromthe current 33 to nine, and include those established by the Ohio StateBar Association and local bar associations in Akron, Cincinnati,Cleveland, Columbus, Dayton, Mahoning County, Stark County and Toledo.Most committees scheduled for decertification would have theopportunity to form a joint committee with one of the eight remaininglocal committees that operates in a contiguous county.

Appointedby Chief Justice Thomas J. Moyer in March 2009, the 18-member TaskForce to Review the Ohio Disciplinary System was charged withdetermining whether the system “provides the most effective andefficient means of investigating, prosecuting and adjudicatingallegations of professional misconduct on the part of Ohio’s lawyersand judges.”

The Supreme Court will accept public comment on the task force recommendations until April. 16.

Whileacknowledging the system’s fairness and impartiality and the extensiveinvolvement of competent professionals and dedicated volunteers, thereport did note room for improvement. “The Task Force believes thecurrent structure of the Ohio disciplinary system produces inconsistentresults with regard to decisions to investigate misconduct allegations,the thoroughness of investigations, the adequacy of charging documents,and the quality of case presentations to the Board.”

Reasonsfor inconsistencies, according to the task force’s findings, includethe high number of certified grievance committees, little oversight, anabsence of uniform procedures and guidelines, and a varying level ofexperience with handling these types of cases depending on the workloadof the committee.

Consequently, certified grievancecommittees in existence after Jan. 1, 2011, would operate underenhanced oversight by the Board of Commissioners on Grievances &Discipline and the Office of Disciplinary Counsel. New requirementswould include education and training, term limits, and certainadministrative duties such as increasing the number of annual meetingsand providing for full-time staff.

Under the proposed newstructure, the process for reviewing and prosecuting professionalmisconduct allegations would be changed to include the development bythe Office of Disciplinary Counsel of uniform procedures governing theintake and investigation of grievances and preparing formal changes forpresentation to the Board. In addition, bar counsel would become moreinvolved in disciplinary decision-making and the Board would reviewprobable cause procedures and recommend any needed changes to theSupreme Court.

This link should take you to the report and related documents. (Mike Frisch)