In re Application of Ferguson

[Cite as In re Application of Ferguson, 128 Ohio St.3d 382, 2011-Ohio-552.]

IN RE APPLICATION OF FERGUSON.

[Cite as In re Application of Ferguson, 128 Ohio St.3d 382, 2011-Ohio-552.]

Applicant failed to prove he possesses the required character, fitness, and moral

qualifications for admission to the practice of law — Applicant may apply

to take the July 2012 bar examination.

(No. 2010-1702 — Submitted January 4, 2011 — Decided February 15, 2011.)

ON REPORT by the Board of Commissioners on Character and

Fitness of the Supreme Court, No. 432.

__________________

Per Curiam.

{¶ 1} James William Ferguson II of Reynoldsburg, Ohio, graduated from

Capital University Law School in May 2009. He has applied to register as a

candidate for admission to the Ohio bar and had filed an application to take the

Ohio bar examination administered in July 2009. Based upon the applicant’s

conduct during an incident with police and his subsequent lack of candor with the

admissions committee of the Fairfield County Bar Association, a panel of the

Board of Commissioners on Character and Fitness, and the Ohio Attorney

General’s Office, the board recommends that we disapprove his character, fitness,

and moral qualifications at present and that we permit the applicant to apply to

take the July 2012 bar exam. We accept the board’s recommendation to

disapprove the pending application and will allow the applicant to apply to take

the July 2012 bar exam.

Summary of Proceedings

{¶ 2} By the summer of 2008, the admissions committee of the Fairfield

County Bar Association had given its provisional recommendation that the

applicant be permitted to sit for the July 2009 bar examination. But following the

SUPREME COURT OF OHIO

applicant’s submission of a supplemental character questionnaire revealing an

October 2008 incident with the Columbus Police Department, the committee

conducted a third character and fitness interview with the applicant. Citing the

applicant’s belligerent and disrespectful conduct while Columbus police officers

arrested his friend, as well as his false representations that he was a lawyer or an

Assistant Attorney General and his lack of candor about those events during his

character and fitness interview, the committee recommended that the applicant’s

character, fitness, and moral qualifications be disapproved.

{¶ 3} The applicant appealed the committee recommendation to the

Board of Commissioners on Character and Fitness. See Gov.Bar R. I(12). The

board appointed a panel to review the applicant’s character, fitness, and moral

qualification. The panel conducted a hearing on January 12, April 23, and May

21, 2010.

{¶ 4} In addition to the concerns expressed by the admissions committee,

the panel noted that although the applicant had been offered a job as an Assistant

Attorney General conditioned upon passage of the bar examination, when he

received notice that he would not be permitted to sit for the July 2009 bar

examination, he did not disclose that fact to the Attorney General’s Office.

Although the applicant claimed to have notified the Solicitor General, the

Solicitor General testified that the applicant was a friend and had made the

disclosure while they played tennis. He stated that he was neither the applicant’s

supervisor nor a person who would handle this type of issue and that he had

instructed the applicant to immediately report the matter to a specific individual in

the human-resources department. The applicant testified that after that

conversation, he notified a different person in the human-resources department.

That person, however, later testified and adamantly denied that such a discussion

ever took place.

2

January Term, 2011

{¶ 5} In light of these findings, the panel unanimously recommended

that the applicant not be approved to take the July 2009 bar examination, but that

he be permitted to apply to take the July 2011 bar examination.

{¶ 6} The board adopted the panel’s finding of facts and

recommendation that the applicant be disapproved, but it recommends that he be

permitted to reapply to take a later bar examination, the July 2012 bar

examination, and that upon his reapplication, the appropriate local bar association

admissions committee review his application and personally interview him.

Disposition

{¶ 7} An applicant to the Ohio bar must prove by clear and convincing

evidence that he or she “possesses the requisite character, fitness, and moral

qualifications for admission to the practice of law.” Gov.Bar R. I(11)(D)(1). The

applicant’s record must justify “the trust of clients, adversaries, courts, and others

with respect to the professional duties owed to them.” Gov.Bar R. I(11)(D)(3).

“A record manifesting a significant deficiency in the honesty, trustworthiness,

diligence, or reliability of an applicant may constitute a basis for disapproval of

the applicant.” Id.

{¶ 8} In determining that the applicant has not proved that he possesses

the requisite character, fitness, and moral qualifications, the board considered the

factors set forth in Gov.Bar R. I(11)(D)(3) and (4). The board has expressed

concern regarding the applicant’s lack of honesty and candor in explaining his

conduct during the police encounter and in failing to report the resulting character

and fitness disapproval to his future employer. See Gov.Bar R. I(11)(D)(3)(g),

(h), and (i). The applicant does not challenge the board’s findings or its

recommendation.

{¶ 9} Based upon the foregoing, we agree that the applicant has failed to

prove that he currently possesses the requisite character, fitness, and moral

qualifications for admission to the practice of law. Therefore, we disapprove his

3

SUPREME COURT OF OHIO

application to take the bar exam at this time. The applicant may apply to take the

July 2012 bar examination and must submit to a full character and fitness

investigation by the appropriate bar association admissions committee.

Judgment accordingly.

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

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

__________________

James William Ferguson II, pro se.

Dagger, Johnston, Miller, Ogilvie & Hampson, L.L.P., and Jeff J.

Spangler, for the Fairfield County Bar Association.

______________________

4