The opinion
[This opinion has been published in Ohio Official Reports at 72 Ohio St.3d 228.]
CLEVELAND BAR ASSOCIATION v. ALLANSON.
[Cite as Cleveland Bar Assn. v. Allanson, 1995-Ohio-309.]
Attorneys at law—Misconduct—Public reprimand—Failure to cooperate in
investigation of alleged misconduct—Failure to timely register as an
attorney.
(No . 94-2673—Submitted March 7, 1995—Decided May 24, 1995.)
ON CERTIFIED REPORT by the Board of Commissioners on Grievances and
Discipline of the Supreme Court, No. 93-04.
__________________
{¶ 1} In a complaint filed on February 16, 1993, relator, Cleveland Bar
Association, charged respondent, Charles S. Allanson III of Cleveland, Ohio,
Attorney Registration No. 0025428, with two counts of professional misconduct.
A panel of the Board of Commissioners on Grievances and Discipline of the
Supreme Court ("board") heard the matter on December 16, 1993.
{¶ 2} Count I of the complaint charged that respondent had violated a
number of Disciplinary Rules, including DR 2-110(A)(3) (failure to promptly
return unearned fees), and that he had not cooperated in relator's investigation, a
violation of former Gov.Bar R.V(5)(A) (now Gov.Bar R. V[4][G]). At the
conclusion of its witness's testimony, relator either dismissed or elected not to
prosecute all but the charges of noncooperation, which relator considered to include
respondent's failure to act on their agreement for his refund of a $300 retainer. The
parties stipulated to respondent's initial failure to cooperate in the investigation and
to his failure to refund the retainer as promised. The panel thus found a violation
of former Gov.Bar R. V(5)(A).
{¶ 3} Count II charged that respondent had failed to timely register as an
attorney as required by Gov.Bar R. VI(6)(A) (sic Gov.Bar R. VI[1][A]). Evidence
SUPREME COURT OF OHIO
submitted to the panel established that respondent did not even attempt to comply
with registration requirements for the 1989-1991 and 1991-1993 biennial periods
until six months after he was served with the instant complaint. The panel thus
found a violation of Gov.Bar R. VI(1)(A).
{¶ 4} The panel recommended that respondent receive a public reprimand
for these infractions. The board adopted the panel's findings and recommendation.
__________________
Michael I. Shapero, for relator.
Charles S. Allanson III, pro se.
__________________
Per Curiam.
{¶ 5} We have reviewed the record and agree with the board's findings and
recommendation. Charles S. Allanson III is hereby publicly reprimanded for his
failure to cooperate with an investigation of alleged misconduct and his failure to
timely register as an attorney. Costs taxed to respondent.
Judgment accordingly.
MOYER, C.J., DOUGLAS, WRIGHT, RESNICK, F.E. SWEENEY, PFEIFER and
COOK, JJ., concur.
__________________
2