Case Title: Trumbull Cty. Bar Assn. v. Bodor

Citation: 2015-Ohio-3634

Docket Number: 

State: ohio

Court: Ohio Supreme Court

Date: 2015-09-09T00:00:00Z

Document:
[Until this opinion appears in the Ohio Official Reports advance sheets, it may be cited as 
Trumbull Cty. Bar Assn. v. Bodor, Slip Opinion No. 2015-Ohio-3634.] 
 
 
 
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. 2015-OHIO-3634 
TRUMBULL COUNTY BAR ASSOCIATION v. BODOR. 
[Until this opinion appears in the Ohio Official Reports advance sheets, it 
may be cited as Trumbull Cty. Bar Assn. v. Bodor, Slip Opinion No.  
2015-Ohio-3634.] 
Attorneys—Misconduct—Failure to promptly refund unearned fee upon 
withdrawal from employment—Public reprimand. 
(No. 2015-0276—Submitted April 14, 2015—Decided September 9, 2015.) 
ON CERTIFIED REPORT by the Board of Professional Conduct 
of the Supreme Court, No. 2014-048. 
_______________________ 
Per Curiam. 
{¶ 1} Respondent, Csaba Andrew Bodor of Warren, Ohio, Attorney 
Registration No. 0025613, was admitted to the practice of law in Ohio in 1972.  
On July 2, 2014, relator, Trumbull County Bar Association, charged Bodor with 
violating four Rules of Professional Conduct in his handling of a client’s fee.  
Bodor and relator subsequently submitted joint stipulations of fact, a single 
SUPREME COURT OF OHIO 
 
2
violation, and aggravating and mitigating factors, and they recommended that 
Bodor be publicly reprimanded for his misconduct.  Relator agreed to withdraw 
the remaining alleged violations.  A panel of the Board of Professional Conduct 
unanimously accepted the parties’ stipulations and recommended sanction, and 
the board adopted the panel report in its entirety. 
{¶ 2} We agree with the recommendation of the board, adopt the parties’ 
stipulations of fact and misconduct, and publicly reprimand Bodor. 
Misconduct 
{¶ 3} In October 2010, Howard Baldwin retained Bodor to file a Chapter 
13 bankruptcy on his behalf.  He signed a fee agreement agreeing to pay $3,000 
for Bodor’s services—the standard fee set by the relevant bankruptcy court for a 
Chapter 13 filing at that time.  Baldwin paid $250 a month from October 2010 
through March 2011, for a total of $1,500, and Bodor deposited those payments in 
his client trust account. 
{¶ 4} Baldwin contacted Bodor and others in Bodor’s office on numerous 
occasions to provide information relevant to his bankruptcy, but he did not 
provide all of the information necessary to prepare and file the bankruptcy 
petition.  Baldwin scheduled a time to meet with Bodor on March 14, 2012, to 
clarify what was required to move forward with his bankruptcy.  But on March 9, 
2012, Bodor sent Baldwin a letter terminating his representation and canceling 
that appointment.  Bodor failed to provide Baldwin with an accounting of the 
$1,500 he had paid and failed to promptly refund any unearned portion of the fee.  
When Bodor did not respond to Baldwin’s request for a refund, Baldwin filed a 
grievance with relator.  Two months after Bodor terminated the representation, he 
sent Baldwin a $550 refund.  He provided an accounting to relator during its 
investigation. 
{¶ 5} The parties stipulated and the board found that Bodor’s conduct 
violated Prof.Cond.R. 1.16(e) (requiring a lawyer to promptly refund any 
January Term, 2015 
 
3
unearned fee upon the lawyer’s withdrawal from employment).  Relator agreed to 
withdraw the remaining alleged violations. 
Sanction 
{¶ 6} When imposing sanctions for attorney misconduct, we consider 
relevant factors, including the ethical duties that the lawyer violated and the 
sanctions imposed in similar cases.  Stark Cty. Bar Assn. v. Buttacavoli, 96 Ohio 
St.3d 424, 2002-Ohio-4743, 775 N.E.2d 818, ¶ 16.  In making a final 
determination, we also weigh evidence of the aggravating and mitigating factors 
listed in Gov.Bar R. V(13). 
{¶ 7} The parties stipulated, and the board agreed, that the relevant 
mitigating factors include the absence of a prior disciplinary record, the absence 
of a dishonest or selfish motive, Bodor’s effort to rectify the consequences of his 
misconduct and his reimbursement of unearned legal fees and expenses, his full 
and free disclosure to the board and his cooperative attitude toward the 
disciplinary proceedings, and evidence of his good character and reputation apart 
from the charged misconduct.  See Gov.Bar R. V(13)(C)(1) through (5).  Other 
than the two-month delay in obtaining the unearned portion of his retainer, 
Baldwin suffered no harm as a result of Bodor’s conduct, and none of the 
aggravating factors set forth in Gov.Bar R. V(13)(B) are present. 
{¶ 8} Based upon Bodor’s misconduct and the presence of significant 
mitigating factors, the parties agreed that the appropriate sanction is a public 
reprimand.  The board agreed and, in support of the recommendation, cited Lake 
Cty. Bar Assn. v. Kubyn, 121 Ohio St.3d 321, 2009-Ohio-1154, 903 N.E.2d 1215.  
In that case, we publicly reprimanded Kubyn for failing to promptly return 
unearned fees and failing to take reasonable steps to protect his client’s interest 
after the client had discharged him.  There were no aggravating factors and the 
mitigating factors were similar to those found here. 
SUPREME COURT OF OHIO 
 
4
{¶ 9} We adopt the board’s findings of fact, find that Bodor’s conduct 
violated Prof.Cond.R. 1.16(e), and dismiss the remaining allegations contained in 
the complaint.  Because we imposed a public reprimand for comparable 
misconduct in Kubyn, we agree that a public reprimand is the appropriate sanction 
here. 
{¶ 10} Accordingly, Csaba Andrew Bodor is hereby publicly reprimanded 
for his misconduct.  Costs are taxed to Bodor. 
Judgment accordingly. 
O’CONNOR, C.J., and PFEIFER, O’DONNELL, LANZINGER, KENNEDY, 
FRENCH, and O’NEILL, JJ., concur. 
_________________ 
Randil J. Rudloff, for relator. 
Thomas J. Wilson, for respondent. 
_________________