Case Title: In re Application of Ferguson

Citation: 2011-Ohio-552

Docket Number: 20101702

State: ohio

Court: Ohio Supreme Court

Date: 2011-02-15T00:00:00Z

Document:
[Until this opinion appears in the Ohio Official Reports advance sheets, it may be cited as In 
re Application of Ferguson, Slip Opinion No. 2011-Ohio-552.] 
 
 
NOTICE 
This slip opinion is subject to formal revision before it is published in 
an advance sheet of the Ohio Official Reports.  Readers are requested 
to promptly notify the Reporter of Decisions, Supreme Court of Ohio, 
65 South Front Street, Columbus, Ohio 43215, of any typographical or 
other formal errors in the opinion, in order that corrections may be 
made before the opinion is published. 
 
SLIP OPINION NO. 2011-OHIO-552 
IN RE APPLICATION OF FERGUSON. 
[Until this opinion appears in the Ohio Official Reports advance sheets, it 
may be cited as In re Application of Ferguson,  
Slip Opinion No. 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 
SUPREME COURT OF OHIO 
 
2
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 
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 
January Term, 2011 
3 
 
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 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. 
{¶ 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. 
SUPREME COURT OF OHIO 
 
4
{¶ 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 
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. 
______________________