Case Title: In re Application of Lenarz

Citation: 2021-Ohio-2108

Docket Number: 2021-0184

State: ohio

Court: Ohio Supreme Court

Date: 2021-06-24T00:00:00Z

Document:
[Until this opinion appears in the Ohio Official Reports advance sheets, it may be cited as In 
re Application of Lenarz, Slip Opinion No. 2021-Ohio-2108.] 
 
 
 
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. 2021-OHIO-2108 
IN RE APPLICATION OF LENARZ. 
[Until this opinion appears in the Ohio Official Reports advance sheets, it 
may be cited as In re Application of Lenarz, Slip Opinion No.  
2021-Ohio-2108.] 
Attorneys—Character and fitness—Application to register as a candidate for 
admission to the practice of law—Applicant established present character, 
fitness, and moral qualifications by clear and convincing evidence—
Application approved. 
(No. 2021-0184—Submitted April 28, 2021—Decided June 24, 2021.) 
ON REPORT by the Board of Commissioners on Character and Fitness of the 
Supreme Court, No. 777. 
_______________________ 
Per Curiam. 
{¶ 1} Applicant, Brett Lee Lenarz, of Pleasant City, Ohio, applied to 
register as a candidate for admission to the practice of law as a second-year law 
SUPREME COURT OF OHIO 
 
2
student in November 2019.  He graduated from the Indiana University Maurer 
School of Law in May 2021. 
{¶ 2} Two members of the Noble County Bar Association’s admissions 
committee interviewed Lenarz in July 2020, and the committee issued a provisional 
report recommending that his character, fitness, and moral qualifications be 
approved.  Because Lenarz had been adjudicated as a delinquent child in 2013 for 
conduct that would constitute a second-degree felony if committed by an adult, his 
application was submitted to the Board of Commissioners on Character and Fitness 
pursuant to Gov.Bar R. I(13)(D)(5)(a) and I(14). 
{¶ 3} In December 2020, a three-member panel of the board conducted a 
hearing, during which it heard testimony from Lenarz and three character witnesses.  
In February 2021, the panel issued a unanimous report finding that Lenarz had 
established his present character, fitness, and moral qualifications by clear and 
convincing evidence and that he should be permitted to sit for the Ohio bar exam, 
provided he complies with all applicable procedures and requirements.  The board 
adopted the panel’s report in its entirety and recommended that we approve 
Lenarz’s registration application. 
{¶ 4} An applicant for admission to the Ohio bar bears the burden of 
proving “by clear and convincing evidence that the applicant possesses the requisite 
character, fitness, and moral qualifications for admission to the practice of law.”  
Gov.Bar R. I(13)(D)(1).  An applicant may be approved for admission if the 
applicant satisfies the essential eligibility requirements for the practice of law as 
defined by the board and demonstrates that “the applicant’s record of conduct 
justifies the trust of clients, adversaries, courts, and others.”  Gov.Bar R. 
I(13)(D)(3). 
{¶ 5} “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.  In determining whether the record demonstrates 
January Term, 2021 
 
3
such a deficiency, we consider a number of factors identified in Gov.Bar R. 
I(13)(D)(3), including whether the applicant has committed or been convicted of 
committing a crime, and we give weight and significance to the applicant’s past 
conduct by considering his age at the time of the conduct, the recency of the 
conduct, the reliability of the information concerning the conduct, the seriousness 
of the conduct, the cumulative effect of the conduct, evidence of rehabilitation, and 
the candor of the applicant in the admissions process, see Gov.Bar R. I(13)(D)(4). 
{¶ 6} If an applicant has been adjudicated a delinquent child for conduct 
that would be a felony if committed by an adult, we also consider (1) the amount 
of time that has passed since that adjudication, (2) whether the rights and privileges 
forfeited by the adjudication have been restored by operation of law, expungement, 
or pardon, (3) whether the applicant is disqualified from holding an office of public 
trust, and (4) how approval of the applicant would impact the public’s perception 
of or confidence in the legal profession.  Gov.Bar R. I(13)(D)(5)(a). 
{¶ 7} The conduct that caused Lenarz to be adjudicated delinquent occurred 
in September 2013 when he was 17 years old and a senior in high school.  He was 
placed on probation until the age of 21, which he served without incident.  He was 
released from all supervision in October 2016, and his juvenile adjudication was 
later sealed and expunged. 
{¶ 8} After graduating from high school, Lenarz attended Muskingum 
University, where he often took 18 credit hours per semester and worked 20 or more 
hours per week to help support his family.  He graduated from college in less than 
four years with a triple major and in the top 5 percent of his class.  Lenarz fully 
disclosed the September 2, 2013 incident in his law-school application.  In a 
statement that accompanied that application, Lenarz stated: 
 
I will live my entire life with the shame of this incident, but 
I refuse to let it define me.  This event has greatly impacted me and 
SUPREME COURT OF OHIO 
 
4
it has taught me many lessons.  These lessons gave me my work 
ethic and outlook on life and have made me the student and the 
person that I am today. 
 
{¶ 9} Several of Lenarz’s college professors responded to inquiries from the 
National Conference of Bar Examiners and offered favorable evidence of his 
character and fitness to practice law.  One professor identified him as an exceptional 
person with a great work ethic.  A second professor noted that Lenarz is a young 
man of “exceptional character” who “overcame great personal hardship and 
emerged as one of our top students.”  A third professor, who taught Lenarz in four 
classes and supervised his senior research project, wrote a lengthy comment 
highlighting his academic achievements, analytical and writing ability, leadership 
skills, and “intellectual maturity and promise.” 
{¶ 10} Two attorneys who supervised Lenarz’s externship at their law 
office also offered positive assessments of his character.  At the hearing before the 
panel, one of those attorneys testified that Lenarz had been open and honest 
throughout his tenure at the firm and that he was willing to ask for help when he 
needed it.  The attorney stated that he had no concerns about Lenarz’s character or 
truthfulness and that he believed Lenarz would be “an excellent person to act in this 
profession.”  The second attorney to testify on Lenarz’s behalf before the panel 
reported that Lenarz conducted himself in a professional manner, performed 
excellent research, and “would absolutely have [the] character and fitness” to 
practice law. 
{¶ 11} Notably, one of the attorneys who interviewed Lenarz on behalf of 
the local bar association was Judge John Nau—the judge who presided over 
Lenarz’s juvenile-delinquency proceedings.  In his report, the judge commented 
that Lenarz was “open and I believe honest about the incident.  Accepted 
January Term, 2021 
 
5
responsibility.  If anything I feel the incident and how the applicant responded to it 
is overall a plus.” 
{¶ 12} Upon consideration of the record and the applicable rules, we agree 
that Lenarz has carried his burden of proving that he currently possesses the 
requisite character, fitness, and moral qualifications for admission to the practice 
of law. 
{¶ 13} Accordingly, we adopt the board’s report and approve Lenarz’s 
pending registration application. 
Judgment accordingly. 
O’CONNOR, C.J., and KENNEDY, FISCHER, DEWINE, DONNELLY, STEWART, 
and BRUNNER, JJ., concur. 
_________________ 
Brett Lee Lenarz, pro se. 
Harry R. Reinhart, for the Noble County Bar Association. 
_________________