“A Dark Blip”

The Ohio Supreme Court stayed a one-year suspension for soliciting sex from a vulnerable client

Respondent, Vincent A. Dugan Jr., of Columbus, Ohio, Attorney Registration No. 0025982, was admitted to the practice of law in Ohio in 1983. He acknowledges that while representing a vulnerable client pro bono in her divorce and protection-order cases in 2022, he sent her a series of explicit and suggestive text messages and repeatedly solicited sexual activity with her. Before a panel of the Board of Professional Conduct, he admitted that his misconduct violated a professional-conduct rule.

After he and relator, disciplinary counsel, stipulated to all relevant facts, misconduct, and aggravating and mitigating factors, the board found by clear and convincing evidence that Dugan had committed the charged misconduct. The board urges us to suspend Dugan from the practice of law for one year but stay his suspension in its entirety on the condition that he commit no further misconduct. It also proposes that he pay the costs of this proceeding. No objections have been filed. For the reasons that follow, we adopt the board’s findings of misconduct and recommended sanction.

Facts

In August 2022, a judicial officer referred a client who was otherwise unable to hire a lawyer to Dugan. He agreed to represent the client pro bono in her pending divorce. He later explained that he had been moved to do so out of sympathy because she had a long history of abuse in her romantic relationships.

The day after he agreed to represent the client, Dugan began to exchange text messages with her. Around midnight, after discussing some details about a hearing to obtain a protection order, he sent her a series of lewd messages. He told her about his sexual preferences and asked her what sex positions she preferred. Dugan admits that he sent this series of messages and other messages thereafter to solicit a sexual relationship with the client.

Over the following weeks, Dugan continued to solicit sexual activity with his client. For example, several days after his initial overture, he sent her a text message offering to give her a chest massage. A few days after that, he sent her a text message saying that he was feeling “[r]eally horny” that night. Throughout September and October, calling her “baby,” he repeatedly suggested that she come over to his residence, overtly or implicitly urging her to have sex with him.

In mid-October, the client started accusing Dugan of ignoring her because she had rejected his sexual advances. Dugan represents that up to that point, he had no memory of many of the earlier text messages, claiming that he had sent them while drunk. The parties have stipulated that the client decided to keep Dugan as her counsel because his representation was pro bono and it appeared that they were close to resolving her divorce.

The client’s divorce was finalized on December 30. However, on December 1, she filed a grievance with relator alleging that Dugan had made sexual advances, tried to sexually assault her, and consistently berated and swore at her. Relator sent Dugan a letter of inquiry in January 2023 concerning the grievance. Dugan responded on March 7 with a 13-page letter discussing the history of his representation of the client and explaining his perspective on the allegations in the grievance. In the letter, he also denied attempting to commit sexual assault but admitted to engaging in “sexual wordplay” with the client.

The board noted a selfish motive and client vulnerability

But the board found three mitigating factors as well. First, without prompting from either relator or the board, Dugan sought other interim rehabilitation. See Gov.Bar R. V(13)(C)(8). At his disciplinary hearing, Dugan explained that he began drinking heavily when his long-term partner suddenly died in February 2021 after a drug overdose. When his client first started raising different allegations against him, Dugan claimed that he looked back over some of his text messages and could not remember “a lot of them” because he was drunk at the time he sent them. Dugan asserted that he took his client’s accusations and the nature of his messages as a wake-up call. He credited the client with helping him stop drinking alcohol.

The shift in Dugan’s conduct has been dramatic. In addition to independently stopping drinking in October 2022, Dugan has resumed attending his church and sought out the support of friends and family. He also has instituted new policies in his law practice, including keeping the door to his office open when meeting with clients, scheduling all meetings with clients before 3:00 p.m. on weekdays, and refraining from texting clients after 7:00 p.m. except to apprise a client of a hearing when he had been unable to reach the client during the day.

Also

Though the death of his partner does not excuse his abuse of alcohol or his client’s trust, the support of those who have known him for approximately 40 years or more, plus his independently seeking rehabilitation, suggest that Dugan’s time of heavy drinking was a dark blip in his career.

Sanction

Dugan sent his client a series of explicit and suggestive text messages. He has never denied this. His comments were inappropriate and particularly egregious given the client’s vulnerability. But while many other disciplined attorneys have obfuscated or denied culpability, Dugan has accepted responsibility for his wrongdoing. And while some disciplined attorneys continue to offend until disciplinary action is taken against them, Dugan recognized that he had a problem and amended his ways long before disciplinary proceedings were brought against him. We agree with the board that Dugan’s honest testimony, genuine remorsefulness for his misconduct, and measurable change render its recommended sanction sufficient to protect the public.

(Mike Frisch)