Case Title: Columbus Bar Assn. v Milless

Citation: 2002-Ohio-3455

Docket Number: 20011829

State: ohio

Court: Ohio Supreme Court

Date: 2002-07-17T00:00:00Z

Document:
[Cite as Columbus Bar Assn. v Milless, 96 Ohio St.3d 74, 2002-Ohio-3455.] 
 
 
COLUMBUS BAR ASSOCIATION v. MILLESS. 
[Cite as Columbus Bar Assn. v. Milless, 96 Ohio St.3d 74, 2002-Ohio-3455.] 
Attorneys at law — Misconduct — One-year suspension with entire year of 
suspension stayed on condition of restitution of unearned retainer to 
client — Failure to adequately represent client — Failure to cooperate 
in disciplinary investigation. 
(No. 2001-1829 — Submitted March 13, 2002 — Decided July 17, 2002.) 
ON CERTIFIED REPORT by the Board of Commissioners on Grievances and 
Discipline of the Supreme Court, No. 00-90. 
__________________ 
 
Per Curiam. 
{¶ 1} In May 1995, John Whittington retained respondent, Charles 
Keller Milless of Columbus, Ohio, Attorney Registration No. 0007025, and paid 
him a retainer of $1,000.  Respondent was to prepare and file an entry that would 
give Whittington custody of his son and increase the amount of child support he 
received from the child’s mother.  In July 1998, the Franklin County Court of 
Common Pleas, Domestic Relations Division, issued an order that Whittington 
return approximately $6,000 to the child’s mother as overpayment for child 
support.  Whittington then checked the court records and discovered that 
respondent had not filed an entry increasing child support to be paid by the 
mother.  According to the documents on file in the case, the mother had overpaid 
Whittington. 
{¶ 2} Whittington’s numerous attempts to contact respondent by phone 
and mail to correct the situation were unsuccessful.  In August 1999, he filed a 
grievance with relator, Columbus Bar Association.  In November 1999, replying 
to relator’s inquires regarding the grievance, respondent promised to file the 
SUPREME COURT OF OHIO 
2 
appropriate entry and rectify the situation.  In December 1999, and again in 
January and in February 2000, respondent told relator that he would take action in 
the case.  However, respondent took no action and thereafter ceased to 
communicate with relator.  Respondent had not yet taken any action in 
Whittington’s case when relator filed a complaint on October 9, 2000, charging 
him with violating several provisions of the Code of Professional Responsibility. 
{¶ 3} Respondent did not answer the complaint, and the Board of 
Commissioners on Grievances and Discipline referred relator’s motion for default 
to Master Commissioner Robin G. Weaver.  Master Commissioner Weaver found 
the facts as alleged and concluded that respondent’s failure to adequately 
represent Whittington and his failure to cooperate in relator’s investigation 
violated DR 1-102(A)(6) (a lawyer shall not engage in conduct adversely 
reflecting on the lawyer’s fitness to practice law), 6-101(A)(3) (a lawyer shall not 
neglect an entrusted legal matter), 7-101(A)(1) (a lawyer shall not intentionally 
fail to seek the lawful objectives of a client), 7-101(A)(2) (a lawyer shall not fail 
to carry out a contract for professional employment), 7-101(A)(3) (a lawyer shall 
not prejudice or damage his client), 9-102(B)(4) (a lawyer shall promptly deliver 
to the client funds or property to which the client is entitled), and Gov.Bar R. V 
(4)(G) (no attorney shall neglect or refuse to assist or testify in an investigation or 
hearing).  The master commissioner recommended that respondent be indefinitely 
suspended from the practice of law and that he make restitution to Whittington of 
the retainer. 
{¶ 4} The board adopted the findings, conclusions, and recommendation 
of the master commissioner. 
{¶ 5} On review of the record we adopt the findings and conclusions of 
the board.  However, we note that respondent’s inaction is an isolated instance of 
nonfeasance in a long and distinguished legal career, that respondent has an 
exemplary record of civic activity, and that during the period these violations 
January Term, 2002 
 
3 
occurred, respondent suffered a number of traumatic events, including the 
removal of a kidney with a malignant tumor, the end of a thirty-year marriage, 
and the death of his mother.  In view of these mitigating circumstances, we find 
that respondent should be and he hereby is suspended from the practice of law for 
one year with the entire year of suspension stayed, conditioned upon respondent’s 
restitution of the unearned retainer, with interest at the judgment rate, within thirty 
days.  Costs are taxed to respondent. 
Judgment accordingly. 
 
MOYER, C.J., DOUGLAS, RESNICK, F.E. SWEENEY, PFEIFER, COOK and 
LUNDBERG STRATTON, JJ., concur. 
__________________ 
 
Arthur J. Marziale, Jr., and Bruce A. Campbell, for relator, Columbus Bar 
Association. 
 
Geoffrey Stern and Christopher J. Weber, for respondent, Charles K. 
Milless. 
__________________