A Sad Emoticon
The Ohio Disciplinary Counsel has charged an attorney with misconduct in connection with his retention by Ms. Carla Stanley to file a motion to secure a judicial release of a third party.
He allegedly failed to escrow an advance fee and had some communication difficulties with the client but then
Immediately after the hearing, respondent and Stanley exchanged a kiss. Later that night, respondent invited Stanley to his home, and they engaged in sexual intercourse.
Between May 19, 2015 and May 27, 2015, respondent sent over 100 personal text messages to Stanley, many of which were sexually oriented and expressed a desire to engage in sexual intercourse…
On May 22, 2015, respondent and Stanley discussed the Howard motion on the telephone.
On May 26, 2015, respondent asked Stanley to “go away with” him via text message. Stanley refused to do so.
On May 27, 2015, respondent and Stanley exchanged numerous text messages with each other in which they argued about the state of their relationship. In the text messages, Stanley asked “How can I expect you to do your job with that attitude? Now I’m concerned” and respondent replied “I’m doing by job. I’m just not asking u out again.”
Respondent did not communicate with Stanley between May 27, 2015 and June 11, 2015.
On June 11, 2015, Stanley called respondent’s cell phone and left a voicemail regarding the Howard motion. Respondent responded via text message and stated “Still working on it. I will get back to u next week.”
On June 11, 2015, the court entered a decision against Stanley in her civil matter; however, respondent failed to advise Stanley of the decision.
On June 14, 2015, respondent sent a text message to Stanley in which he stated “I miss you” and sent a sad emoticon.
On June 19, 2015, Stanley called respondent’s cell phone. Respondent did not respond to the call.
On June 23, 2015, Stanley called respondent’s cell phone. Respondent did not respond to the call.
On June 24, 2015, Stanley called respondent’s cell phone. After not reaching respondent, Stanley sent a text message inquiring about whether there was a decision in the civil matter and the status of the motion for Howard. Respondent then initiated the following text message exchange with Stanley:
Respondent: Omg you are killing [sic] being so impatient. My God!!!!!
Respondent: Stop!!!!!
Respondent: When I know something I will let you know. I wish you never fucking hired me. It’s not worth this shit
Stanley: My expectations are not ANY higher than any other client. I did hire you and I expect you to do your job. Communication is a high priority, but apparently you do not agree.
Respondent: I tell clients things when I have something to tell them. Stop doing this. When I know something I will tell you. Please stop this
Stanley: I paid you $1000 to do the judicial and I’d like to know that you have done the things that you said you would do. As far as I know the only thing that you have done is filed the motion that was already prepared by Joe Scott. As your client I have the right to know what you have done. Don’t tell me to stop when you refuse to take my calls on an ongoing basis.
There were further texts and a refund demand. The attorney offered a $500 refund but allegedly did not follow through.
One unusual charge alleges attorney plagiarism
By plagiarizing another attorney’s work product and filing it with the court as if it was his own work, respondent violated Prof. Cond. R. 8.4( c) [it is professional misconduct for a lawyer to engage in conduct involving dishonesty, fraud, deceit or misrepresentation] and Prof. Cond. R. 8.4(h) (conduct that adversely reflects on the practice of law];
Is there anyone out there who thinks that a dishonesty/plagiarism charge may not be appropriate when a lawyer copies another lawyer’s pleading?
I do not know the underlying evidence to support that particular charge but it seems a slippery slope to me.
A second count charges a number of escrow account violations. (Mike Frisch)