A Columbus, Ohio attorney was suspended from practice by the Supreme Court of Ohio for making his client wait nine years to receive a portion of her divorce settlement.
The per curiam opinion ordered the suspension of the attorney for 18 months, with 12 months stayed, followed by a year of monitored probation.
The Columbus Bar Association filed the complaint on behalf of the client and asked the Court to order the attorney to pay between $7,900 and $35,000 in lost opportunity investment costs as restitution to the client. The Court voted 4-2 not to grant restitution, stating the matter is best suited for a separate legal malpractice lawsuit.
As part of a divorce settlement, the client's ex-husband was directed to execute a qualified domestic relations order (QDRO) to transfer $19,247 from his 401(k) account to the client. The trial court directed the defendant to prepare the QDRO. He did not do so for nine years despite repeated phone calls and emails from the client and repeated promises and excuses from the defendant.
The Board of Professional Conduct found that the attorney violated several rules, including those requiring him to act with reasonable diligence in handling a client matter and to keep a client reasonably informed about the status of the client's legal matter. Dan Trevas "Ohio attorney suspended for making client wait 9 years for settlement" www.highlandcountypress.com. (Dec. 10, 2023).
Commentary
This opinion also noted that this was the attorney's third Court-ordered suspension. He was suspended for 10 days in 2005 for missing the deadline to register as an active attorney. In May 2020, the Court suspended him for 18 months, all stayed, for neglecting three client matters, failing to return fees he did not earn, and refusing to cooperate with disciplinary investigations. The September 2022 complaint, which resulted in this opinion, was the third sanction.
Neglecting client matters and failing to communicate with the client are by far the most common reasons attorneys are disciplined or disbarred.
The ABA Model Rule 1.3 states: "A lawyer shall act with reasonable diligence and promptness in representing a client." A comment to this rule states:
"Perhaps no professional shortcoming is more widely resented than procrastination." R.1.3 (3).
The reasons for failing to complete client matters in a timely fashion range from a simple lack of interest in the matter to not wanting to deal with difficult clients, a lack of organization, or simply feeling overwhelmed. Some of these reasons can be addressed by referring the work to others, using a system designed to overcome procrastination, or seeking professional help for depression or anxiety.
The ABA and many state bar associations have programs to assist attorneys struggling with problems that may impact their ability to practice law competently.
