Third Strike

A third bar discipline case merited permanent disbarment rather than the indefinite suspension proposed by the Board on Professional Conduct, according to a decision issued yesterday by the Ohio Supreme Court

Here, Harvey failed to return unearned fees, which, as indicated in Frazier and Henry, is tantamount to theft of client funds. He has a history of misconduct, including a pattern of not simply neglecting clients but abandoning them. And as the board found, he “has a history of not complying with orders of the Supreme Court of Ohio and ignoring the requirements associated with the disciplinary process.” Considering this grievous misconduct, our precedent, the profusion of aggravating factors, and the absence of any mitigating factors, we hold that he is not fit to practice law in Ohio and that disbarment is therefore the only appropriate sanction.

A minority would adopt the proposed sanction

KENNEDY, FRENCH, and O’NEILL, JJ., dissent and would indefinitely suspend the respondent and deny credit for time served under any other suspensions.

(Mike Frisch)