Case Title: Disciplinary Counsel v. Gunnoe

Citation: 1997-Ohio-170

Docket Number: 19970435

State: ohio

Court: Ohio Supreme Court

Date: 1997-07-16T00:00:00Z

Document:
OFFICE OF DISCIPLINARY COUNSEL v. GUNNOE. 
[Cite as Disciplinary Counsel v. Gunnoe (1997), ___Ohio St.3d ___.] 
Attorneys at law – Misconduct – Public reprimand – Settling medical 
malpractice action without client’s express authorization. 
 
(No. 97-435 – Submitted April 16, 1997 – Decided July 16, 1997.) 
 
ON CERTIFIED REPORT by the Board of Commissioners on Grievances and 
Discipline of the Supreme Court, No. 95-35. 
 
On April 10, 1995, relator, Office of Disciplinary Counsel, filed a complaint 
charging, inter alia, that respondent, Gerald Eugene Gunnoe of Centerville, Ohio, 
Attorney Registration No. 0003460, violated DR 7-101(A)(3) (prejudicing or 
damaging a client during the course of representation).  After respondent filed an 
answer, the parties submitted agreed stipulations and a deposition of respondent to 
a panel of the Board of Commissioners on Grievances and Discipline of the 
Supreme Court (“board”).  On March 20, 1996, the panel heard character 
witnesses and mitigation evidence. 
 
The panel found that in June 1988, respondent agreed to represent Mary 
Johnson in a medical malpractice action.  He discussed the potential settlement 
value with Johnson and, after the statute of limitations had run, accepted a $7,000 
 
2
settlement offer from the insurance carrier without Johnson’s express 
authorization.  Thereafter, Johnson, retaining new legal counsel, filed a 
malpractice claim against respondent, and received a settlement of $15,000 from 
respondent’s malpractice carrier.  The panel concluded that by settling a case 
without his client’s express authorization, respondent had violated DR 7-
101(A)(3).  The panel recommended that the respondent be publicly reprimanded. 
 
The board agreed with the findings, conclusion, and recommendation of the 
panel. 
___________________ 
 
Geoffrey Stern, Disciplinary Counsel, Cynthia L. Roehl and Sally Ann Steuk, 
Assistant Disciplinary Counsel, for relator. 
 
Gerald E. Gunnoe, pro se. 
___________________ 
 
Per Curiam.  Upon review of the record, we adopt the findings, conclusion, 
and recommendation of the board.  Respondent is hereby publicly reprimanded.  
Costs are taxed to respondent. 
Judgment accordingly. 
 
3
 
MOYER, C.J., DOUGLAS, RESNICK, F.E. SWEENEY, PFEIFER, COOK and 
LUNDBERG STRATTON, JJ., concur.