Dayton Bar Assn. v. Nowicki

[Cite as Dayton Bar Assn. v. Nowicki, 133 Ohio St.3d 74, 2012-Ohio-3912.]

DAYTON BAR ASSOCIATION v. NOWICKI.

[Cite as Dayton Bar Assn. v. Nowicki, 133 Ohio St.3d 74, 2012-Ohio-3912.]

Attorneys—Misconduct—Failure to represent client with reasonable diligence—

Six-month suspension stayed on conditions including restitution.

(No. 2012-0276—Submitted March 7, 2012—Decided September 4, 2012.)

ON CERTIFIED REPORT by the Board of Commissioners on Grievances and

Discipline of the Supreme Court, No. 11-082.

__________________

Per Curiam.

{¶ 1} Respondent, Griff M. Nowicki of Huber Heights, Ohio, Attorney

Registration No. 0071849, was admitted to the Ohio bar in 2000. On October 10,

2011, relator, Dayton Bar Association, filed a complaint alleging that Nowicki

had agreed to represent Shannon M. Millhoff in a civil matter but failed to prepare

for the trial, enter an appearance on Millhoff’s behalf, and timely file objections

to the magistrate’s decision and also failed to timely appeal the judgment against

his client. As a result of Nowicki’s failures, an $8,262.94 judgment was entered

against the client.

{¶ 2} The parties have submitted a consent-to-discipline agreement

pursuant to BCGD Proc.Reg. 11. In that agreement, they stipulate that the

operative facts as alleged in the complaint are true and that Nowicki’s conduct

violated Prof.Cond.R. 1.3 (requiring a lawyer to act with reasonable diligence in

representing a client).

{¶ 3} The parties stipulate to the following aggravating factors: (1)

Nowicki received an attorney-registration suspension for his failure to timely

register for the 2005-2007 biennium, In re Attorney Registration Suspension of

Nowicki, 107 Ohio St.3d 1431, 2005-Ohio-6408, 838 N.E.2d 671, although his

SUPREME COURT OF OHIO

license was reinstated just five days later, In re Nowicki, 107 Ohio St.3d 1705,

2006-Ohio-13, 840 N.E.2d 209, and (2) Nowicki’s misconduct and the resulting

judgment caused extreme financial hardship for Millhoff, a single mother

supporting three young children. See BCGD Proc.Reg. 10(B)(1)(a) and (h).

{¶ 4} And as to mitigating factors, they stipulate that Nowicki has (1)

instituted a more thorough process to document communications with his clients,

(2) started using an online calendar in addition to a paper calendar, (3) adopted a

process to digitize all documents received by his office, (4) joined a law firm that

will provide additional staff and resources to avoid oversights, and (5) has

obtained the release of garnishment, paid Millhoff $400, agreed to pay Millhoff

an additional $2,142.36 in monthly installments of $250, and made arrangements

to satisfy the remainder of the judgment.

{¶ 5} Based upon the foregoing, the parties stipulate that Nowicki should

be suspended from the practice of law for six months, all stayed on the conditions

that he reimburse Millhoff $2,142.36 in monthly installments of at least $250 and

satisfy the remainder of the judgment against her.

{¶ 6} A panel of the Board of Commissioners on Grievances and

Discipline reviewed the consent-to-discipline agreement. Observing that the

parties’ stipulated sanction was consistent with sanctions imposed by this court

for similar misconduct, the panel and board recommend that we adopt the

agreement. See, e.g., Cuyahoga Cty. Bar Assn. v. Drain, 120 Ohio St.3d 288,

2008-Ohio-6141, 898 N.E.2d 580 (imposing a six-month suspension, all stayed on

conditions, on an attorney who neglected a client’s matter by failing to adequately

prepare and missing the statute of limitations for her claim).

{¶ 7} Having considered Nowicki’s misconduct, the aggravating and

mitigating factors listed in BCGD Proc.Reg. 10, the sanctions we have imposed

for similar misconduct, and the recommendations of the panel and board, we

accept the parties’ consent-to-discipline agreement.

2

January Term, 2012

{¶ 8} Accordingly, Griff M. Nowicki is hereby suspended from the

practice of law for six months, all stayed on the conditions that he reimburse

Millhoff $2,142.36 in monthly installments of at least $250, with payment to be

completed within six months of this judgment, and satisfy the remainder of the

judgment against her. If Nowicki fails to comply with the conditions of the stay,

the stay will be lifted and respondent shall serve the full six-month suspension.

Costs are taxed to Nowicki.

Judgment accordingly.

O’CONNOR, C.J., and PFEIFER, LUNDBERG STRATTON, O’DONNELL,

LANZINGER, CUPP, and MCGEE BROWN, JJ., concur.

__________________

Dunlevey, Mahan & Furry and David M. Rickert, for relator.

Griff M. Nowicki, pro se.

______________________

3