Opinion

Northwest Ohio Bar Assn. v. Noble

  • 1992 Ohio 67
Court
Ohio Supreme Court
Filed
Sep 1, 1992
Status
Published
Cited by
0 cases

The opinion

OPINIONS OF THE SUPREME COURT OF OHIO

The full texts of the opinions of the Supreme Court of

Ohio are being transmitted electronically beginning May 27,

1992, pursuant to a pilot project implemented by Chief Justice

Thomas J. Moyer.

Please call any errors to the attention of the Reporter's

Office of the Supreme Court of Ohio. Attention: Walter S.

Kobalka, Reporter, or Justine Michael, Administrative

Assistant. Tel.: (614) 466-4961; in Ohio 1-800-826-9010.

Your comments on this pilot project are also welcome.

NOTE: Corrections may be made by the Supreme Court to the

full texts of the opinions after they have been released

electronically to the public. The reader is therefore advised

to check the bound volumes of Ohio St.3d published by West

Publishing Company for the final versions of these opinions.

The advance sheets to Ohio St.3d will also contain the volume

and page numbers where the opinions will be found in the bound

volumes of the Ohio Official Reports.

Northwest Ohio Bar Association v. Noble.

[Cite as Northwest Ohio Bar Assn. v. Noble (1992),

Ohio St.3d .]

Attorneys at law -- Misconduct -- Two-year suspension --

Violation of Disciplinary Rules in handling of two

bankruptcy cases -- Engaging in conduct involving

dishonesty, fraud, deceit or misrepresentation --

Continuing multiple employment where employment may

adversely affect professional judgment on behalf of client

-- Unauthorized communication with party represented by

another lawyer -- Conduct adversely reflecting on fitness

to practice law -- Neglect of a legal matter entrusted --

Failure to preserve identity of client funds.

(No. 91-2003 -- Submitted February 18, 1992 -- Decided

September 2, 1992.)

On Certified Report by the Board of Commissioners on

Grievances and Discipline of the Supreme Court, No. 90-51.

Relator, Northwest Ohio Bar Association, filed a complaint

charging respondent, John D. Noble, with multiple violations of

the Code of Professional Responsibility stemming from his

handling of two bankruptcy cases. The matter was heard by a

panel of this court's Board of Commissioners on Grievances and

Discipline ("board"). The record and stipulations disclose the

following facts:

The Walter Bankruptcy

On March 18, 1987, Noble filed a Chapter 12 bankruptcy

petition on behalf of Jimmie Walter, a farmer. Noble then

sought to obtain credit for Walter to buy seed and fertilizer

for his 1987 crops. Noble contacted three suppliers:

Glenn-Garno Seeds, Prattville Fertilizer and Grain Co., Inc.

("Prattville") and Falor Farm Center, Inc. All three agreed to

supply Walter with fertilizer and seed, extending an

approximate total of $170,000 worth of credit. As "input

creditors," these suppliers were entitled to first priority

liens on the 1987 crops from certain specified acreage.

Moreover, pursuant to the bankruptcy court's order, each time

Walter received proceeds from the sale of these crops, the

input creditors were to receive ninety percent and Walter ten

percent, on a check-by-check basis. Under Noble's agreement

with Walter, Noble was to get one half of Walter's share, i.e.,

five percent of the proceeds, in payment of attorney fees.

Noble agreed to disburse the crop proceeds and file

Uniform Commercial Code liens to protect the input creditors'

security interest. Noble perfected the liens, for which

service he billed Prattville $250.

A Disclosure Statement and Plan, prepared by Noble and

relied upon by the input creditors, showed that the input

creditors were to receive a priority lien on eight hundred

acres of corn and five hundred fifty-eight acres of soybeans.

However, Walter was participating in a government program that

limited his 1987 corn acreage to approximately four hundred

seventy-five acres. At the hearing Noble claimed ignorance of

this limitation; he said that, in preparing the disclosure, he

had relied on Walter's statements as to how much Walter

intended to plant.

On August 26, 1987, Noble signed a waiver of the input

creditors' priority in the 1987 crops in favor of the United

States Department of Agriculture. The input creditors never

authorized this.

On September 28, 1987, the Metamora Elevator Co. issued a

$30,492.46 check to Walter for his 1987 soybean crop. Noble

did not disburse ninety percent to the input creditors and ten

percent to Walter, as the court order required. Instead, he

disbursed $14,848 to John Deere Credit Corporation ("John

Deere") and $1,559.40 to Lyons L.P. Gas without the knowledge

or approval of the input creditors. Noble also disbursed

$1,524.62 to himself, even though he had neither sought nor

obtained the bankruptcy court's approval of his fee. Finally,

Noble disbursed $1,489.85 to Walter and $11,070.59 to the input

creditors.

Noble followed a similar pattern with two subsequent

checks. On October 23, 1987, the Commodity Credit Corporation

issued a check for $26,547.39. Noble disbursed $13,154.68 to

the input creditors, gave Walter $10,000, and paid himself

$3,392.71, again without seeking the court's permission.

(Moreover, Noble's self-payment far exceeded the five percent

his fee agreement called for.) On November 5, 1987, Metamora

Elevator Co. issued a check for $4,806.95. Although Walter was

entitled to only ten percent, Noble disbursed $697.01 to Walter.

At the hearing, Noble tried to justify his improper

disbursement of the September check by asserting that the

September check might have been from the sale of 1985-1986

stored crops, not 1987 crops subject to the input creditors'

liens. Had that been so, the input creditors would have been

entitled to no portion of the September check. The $10,000

payment to Walter from the October check was intended to

reimburse Walter for the allegedly erroneous September

disbursements to the input creditors. However, an affidavit

prepared by Noble and signed by Walter in December 1987

indicates that the September check represented 1987 crop

proceeds; moreover, Noble so stated a year later during a

deposition of Walter.

Noble also testified that, had he not paid John Deere from

the September check, John Deere would have repossessed Walter's

equipment, making it impossible for Walter to get the 1987 crop

in; thus, paying John Deere was in the input creditors'

interest. Nevertheless, Noble admitted that he failed to

inform the input creditors that he intended to pay John Deere

or to obtain their permission to do so.

When the input creditors discovered that Walter had not

planted as many acres as his April disclosure statement had

said he would, they hired a lawyer, Jan Stamm, to represent

their interests. Although Noble knew that the input creditors

had hired Stamm, he directly contacted Prattville's manager

twice. Noble stipulated that this conduct violated DR 7-104.

The Cook Bankruptcy

In 1987, Mr. and Mrs. Norman Cook hired Noble to handle

their Chapter 11 bankruptcy. Noble filed the Cooks' bankruptcy

petition. On January 2, 1989, with the bankruptcy action still

pending, Norman Cook died.

On April 1, 1989, Mrs. Cook liquidated the family farm and

its equipment. The Cooks owed the Farmers Home Administration

("FmHA") over $200,000, secured by a lien on the equipment;

however, FmHA agreed to allow the equipment's sale and accept

the proceeds, less funeral costs, in settlement. Accordingly,

the bankruptcy court issued an order permitting Mrs. Cook to

sell all property and equipment free of lien.

The proceeds from the equipment's sale totaled

$14,330.11. Noble subsequently received a check in that

amount, made out to him and Mrs. Cook, dated April 3, 1989.

Noble deposited this check into his trust account and used

$4,517.75 to pay the funeral expenses, leaving $9,812.36.

However, instead of settling FmHA's claim with this money,

Noble used it to pay personal expenses. Moreover, he

commingled his own funds into the trust account in an attempt

to cover his defalcations. Noble stipulated that this conduct

violated DR 1-102(A)(4), 1-102(A)(6) and 9-102.

To Mrs. Cook's detriment, Noble delayed the disposition of

her bankruptcy case while trying to replace the misappropriated

funds. He did not file a Plan and Disclosure Statement with

the bankruptcy court until January 1990, and when he did file

it, he initially failed to provide for the United States

Trustee's fees. Moreover, he never filed an Application for

Settlement of Indebtedness with FmHA, as required. Not until

June 11, 1990, did Noble finally send FmHA a check for

$9,812.36.

Mrs. Cook hired new counsel in June 1990; counsel filed

her settlement application with FmHA in October. By then,

however, Mrs. Cook had collected over $70,000 in death

benefits, which she was required to disclose on the

application. An FmHA representative informed new counsel that

the $9,812.36 settlement proposal was no longer acceptable.

Noble stipulated that his delay violated DR 6-101 and harmed

Mrs. Cook financially.

In mitigation, Noble testified that his son committed

suicide in 1978 and that Noble had been under extraordinary

emotional and financial stress ever since. Noble's emotional

state deteriorated to a point where "I hated the world * * *."

He had serious marital problems and overextended himself

financially. Finally, in 1989 or 1990, a court entered a

$900,000 judgment against Noble for injuring another person in

an auto accident in 1987.

The panel found that, in the Walter bankruptcy, Noble

violated DR 1-102(A)(4) (dishonesty, fraud, deceit, or

mispresentation), 5-105(B) (continuing multiple employment

where employment may adversely affect professional judgment on

behalf of client), and 7-104(A)(1) (unauthorized communication

with party represented by another lawyer). In the Cook

bankruptcy, the panel found Noble violated DR 1-102(A)(4),

1-102(A)(6) (conduct adversely reflecting on fitness to

practice), 6-101(A)(3) (neglect of a legal matter entrusted to

him) and 9-102(A) (failure to preserve identity of client

funds). The panel recommended a two-year suspension. The

board made the same findings and recommendation.

Weaner, Zimmerman, Bacon, Yoder & Hubbard and Stanley J.

Yoder; and James P. Spriggs, for relator.

John D. Noble, pro se, and Charles W. Kettlewell, for

respondent.

Per Curiam. We concur in the board's findings and

recommendation. John D. Noble is suspended from the practice

of law in Ohio for two years. Costs taxed to respondent.

Judgment accordingly.

Moyer, C.J., Sweeney, Holmes, Douglas, Wright, H. Brown

and Resnick, JJ., concur.

This is a copy of a public record, reproduced as it was published. It is not legal advice, and it may not be the version a court would rely on. Check the official source before you cite it.

A word about cookies

We need a few to keep you signed in and the library working. The rest help us see which pages people use and where they get stuck. They stay off unless you say yes.