Thursday, August 7, 2008

"Not Fit To Practice Law"

Another day, another permanent disbarment, from the Ohio Supreme Court. This case involved an attorney with a prior disciplinary record who was found to have engaged in a prohibited business transaction with a client. The misconduct is described on the court's web page:

... by paying advance distributions “against future profits” to himself and a third partner in the trust, and failing to repay the remaining partner who had capitalized the trust when those profits failed to be realized, Marosan violated the state discipline rule that bars an attorney from entering into a business transaction with a client when they have differing interests and the client expects the lawyer to exercise his professional judgment for the benefit of the client. The Court also affirmed the board’s finding that, by failing to answer the complaint filed against him or to respond to multiple inquiries from authorities investigating his alleged misconduct, Marosan also violated the state bar governance rule that requires attorneys to cooperate with all disciplinary investigations.

In setting the sanction for his misconduct as disbarment, the Court noted the aggravating factors that Marosan’s law license has been under suspension since October 2005 for two prior incidents of professional misconduct, that he acted with a selfish or dishonest motive, and that he caused harm to a vulnerable client and failed to make restitution. The Court concluded that “Respondent’s conduct in this matter – and in his previous disciplinary cases – demonstrates that he is not fit to practice law.”

(Mike Frisch)

Bar Discipline & Process | Permalink

TrackBack URL for this entry:

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference "Not Fit To Practice Law":


Post a comment