Case Title: Cleveland Bar Assn. v. Cicirella

Citation: 1999-Ohio-194

Docket Number: 19990834

State: ohio

Court: Ohio Supreme Court

Date: 1999-09-22T00:00:00Z

Document:
[Cite as Cleveland Bar Assn. v. Cicirella, 86 Ohio St.3d 544, 1999-Ohio-194.] 
 
 
 
 
 
CLEVELAND BAR ASSOCIATION v. CICIRELLA. 
[Cite as Cleveland Bar Assn. v. Cicirella (1999), 86 Ohio St.3d 544.] 
Attorneys at law — Misconduct — Two-year suspension with one year of sanction 
stayed and attorney ordered to pay $1,000 to client — Handling a legal 
matter without adequate preparation — Neglecting an entrusted legal 
matter — Failing to cooperate in disciplinary investigation. 
(No. 99-834 — Submitted June 22, 1999 — Decided September 8, 1999.) 
ON CERTIFIED REPORT by the Board of Commissioners on Grievances and 
Discipline of the Supreme Court, No. 98-44. 
 
In 1995, Joseph and Linda Bowen sued Paul and Alana Shaffer with respect 
to the sale of a house.  The Shaffers retained respondent, Leonette F. Cicirella of 
Bedford, Ohio, Attorney Registration No. 0042219, who advised them to file a 
counterclaim alleging that the Bowens had harassed them. 
 
In October 1996, respondent informed the Shaffers that their case had been 
referred for arbitration.  Although respondent instructed the Shaffers to make 
copies of evidence to substantiate their harassment claim at the arbitration 
proceeding, she did not present any evidence or argument to support the Shaffers’ 
counterclaim and did not object to new issues raised by the Bowens that were not 
part of their original complaint. 
 
In November 1996, the common pleas court entered judgment in favor of the 
Bowens in the amount of $1,000 and also ruled against the Shaffers on their 
counterclaim.  Despite the Shaffers’ repeated telephone messages inquiring about 
the case, respondent never informed them of the arbitration award or the judgment 
entered on the award.  In 1997, the Shaffers contacted the court and were notified 
of the judgment and that the time for appeal had expired. 
 
2 
 
The Shaffers then filed a grievance against respondent with relator, 
Cleveland Bar Association.  Respondent failed to respond to relator’s investigative 
inquiries, and although she on one occasion promised to file a response, she did not 
do so. 
 
On August 10, 1998, relator filed a complaint charging the respondent with 
violating two Disciplinary Rules and a Rule for the Government of the Bar.  After 
respondent failed to file an answer, the matter was submitted to a panel of the 
Board of Commissioners on Grievances and Discipline of the Supreme Court 
(“board”) on relator’s motion for default judgment. 
 
The panel found the facts as previously set forth, and concluded that 
respondent’s conduct violated DR 6-101(A)(2) (handling a legal matter without 
adequate preparation), 6-101(A)(3) (neglecting an entrusted legal matter), and 
Gov.Bar R. V(4)(G) (failing to cooperate in a disciplinary investigation).  The 
panel recommended that respondent be indefinitely suspended from the practice of 
law in Ohio.  The board adopted the findings and conclusions of the panel, but 
recommended that, based on the fact that only a single matter was involved, 
respondent be suspended from the practice of law in Ohio for two years, with one 
year stayed and that respondent pay $1,000 to the Shaffers. 
__________________ 
 
Porter, Wright, Morris & Arthur and Daniel F. Gourash; Van Aken, Withers 
& Webster and Kevin L. Starrett, for relator. 
__________________ 
 
Per Curiam.  We adopt the findings, conclusions, and recommendation of 
the board.  Although an indefinite suspension is generally warranted when a 
pattern of neglecting legal matters is coupled with a failure to cooperate in the 
ensuing disciplinary investigation, there is no such pattern of neglect related to 
multiple clients here.  See Cleveland Bar Assn. v. Rollins (1999), 84 Ohio St.3d 
 
3 
408, 704 N.E.2d 1210.  The board was justified in relying on the lack of such 
pattern to impose a lesser sanction.  Respondent is hereby suspended from the 
practice of law in Ohio for two years, with one year stayed, and she is ordered to 
pay $1,000 to the Shaffers.  Costs are taxed to respondent. 
Judgment accordingly. 
 
MOYER, C.J., DOUGLAS, RESNICK, F.E. SWEENEY, PFEIFER, COOK and 
LUNDBERG STRATTON, JJ., concur.