Title: Cincinnati Bar Assn. v. Sershion

State: ohio

Issuer: Ohio Supreme Court

Document:

[Until this opinion appears in the Ohio Official Reports advance sheets, it may be cited as 
Cincinnati Bar Assn. v. Sershion, Slip Opinion No. 2010-Ohio-3803.] 
 
 
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. 2010-OHIO-3803 
CINCINNATI BAR ASSOCIATION v. SERSHION ET AL. 
[Until this opinion appears in the Ohio Official Reports advance sheets, it 
may be cited as Cincinnati Bar Assn. v. Sershion,  
Slip Opinion No. 2010-Ohio-3803.] 
Unauthorized practice of law — Attempt to negotiate settlement of personal-
injury claim — Consent decree accepted — Injunction imposed. 
(No. 2010-0794 ⎯ Submitted May 26, 2010 ⎯ Decided August 24, 2010.) 
ON FINAL REPORT by the Board on the Unauthorized Practice of Law of the 
Supreme Court, No. UPL 10-02. 
__________________ 
Per Curiam. 
{¶ 1} Pursuant to Gov.Bar R. VII(5b), the Board on the Unauthorized 
Practice of Law has recommended our approval of a consent decree proposed by 
relator, Cincinnati Bar Association, and respondents, Terry A. Sershion and 
Fiduciary One, L.L.C.  We accept the board’s recommendation and approve the 
proposed consent decree submitted by the parties, as follows: 
{¶ 2} “Stipulated Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law: 
SUPREME COURT OF OHIO 
2 
 
{¶ 3} “1.  Relator, Cincinnati Bar Association, is duly authorized to 
investigate and prosecute activities which may constitute the unauthorized 
practice [of] law in the State of Ohio. 
{¶ 4} “2.  Respondent, Terry A. Sershion, is an individual and sole 
member of Fiduciary One, LLC, a Limited Liability Company organized under 
the laws of Ohio. 
{¶ 5} “3.  Respondent Sershion individually and as the sole member of 
Fiduciary One, LLC held himself out as being able to negotiate and settle 
insurance claims for (sic) including claims for bodily injury and extra-contractual 
damages or ‘bad faith.’ 
{¶ 6} “4.  Respondent Sershion is an Ohio licensed public insurance 
adjuster. 
{¶ 7} “5.  Respondent Sershion has never been admitted to the practice 
of law in Ohio or any other state. 
{¶ 8} “6.  These proceedings identified one Ohio resident for whom 
respondent attempted to negotiate the settlement of a claim for bodily injury.  In 
that matter Respondent Sershion engaged in the negotiation of a claim for bodily 
injury to a minor arising out of a motor vehicle accident. 
{¶ 9} “7.  Sershion published an advertisement on the internet claiming 
to have expertise in the resolution of claims for ‘bad faith.’  
{¶ 10} “8.  Shortly after the commencement of formal discovery in the 
within matter, Respondent Sershion agreed to cease and desist from activities 
constituting the unauthorized practice of law. 
{¶ 11} “9.  The Supreme Court of Ohio has original jurisdiction regarding 
admission to the practice of law, the discipline of persons so admitted, and all 
other matters relating to the practice of law.  Section 2(B)(1)(g), Article IV, Ohio 
Constitution; Royal Indemnity Co. v. J.C. Penney Co. (1986), 27 Ohio St.3d 31, 
27 OBR 447, 501 N.E.2d 617. 
January Term, 2010 
3 
 
{¶ 12} “10.  The unauthorized practice of law consists of rendering legal 
services for another by a person not admitted to practice in Ohio.  Gov.Bar R. 
VII(2)(A). 
{¶ 13} “11.  The practice of law includes the negotiation and settlement of 
claims of bodily injury, Cincinnati Bar Assn. v. Fehler-Schultz (1992), 64 Ohio 
St.3d 452, 597 N.E.2d 79, and the giving of legal advice.  Land Title Abstract & 
Trust Co. v. Dworken (1934), 129 Ohio St. 23, 1 O.O. 313, 193 N.E. 650. 
{¶ 14} “12.  Ohio’s licensed public insurance adjuster statute, R.C. 
3951.01 et seq., only permits public adjusters to represent clients in claims for 
loss or damage under a policy of insurance covering real or personal property. 
{¶ 15} “13.  Respondent’s presentation of claims of bodily injury under 
liability policies is the unauthorized practice of law.  The assertion of claims for 
extra-contractual damages under other policies of insurance would also be the 
unauthorized practice of law. 
{¶ 16} “14.  Respondent Sershion’s presentation of a claim on behalf of 
the minor * * and her parents in and after October 2007 constituted the 
unauthorized practice of law. 
{¶ 17} “15.  Each of the above acts is found to constitute the unauthorized 
practice of law and is based upon specific evidence or an admission that contains 
sufficient information to demonstrate the specific activities upon which the 
conclusions are drawn in compliance with Gov.Bar R. VII(7)(H); and Cleveland 
Bar Assn. v. CompManagement, Inc., 111 Ohio St.3d 444, 2006-Ohio-6108, 857 
N.E.2d 95, at ¶ 24-26. 
{¶ 18} “Waiver of Civil Penalty 
{¶ 19} “For the following reasons, Relator recommends that civil 
penalties not be  issued in this case: 
{¶ 20} “1.  Relator’s investigating counsel reports to the Board that he 
received an initial inquiry from counsel to an insurance company regarding 
SUPREME COURT OF OHIO 
4 
 
Respondent’s involvement as the presenter of a claim for injury to a minor arising 
out of a motor vehicle accident.  Relator’s Investigative counsel sought further 
information from the individuals upon whose behalf Respondent was allegedly 
functioning.  Repeated contacts to those persons produced no response and no 
cooperation. 
{¶ 21} “2.  Relator’s investigating counsel also presented inquiry to the 
Ohio Department of Insurance under whose authority Respondent exercised the 
privileges of a licensed Ohio Insurance Public Adjustor.  The organization 
conducted its own confidential investigation and did not find any issues regarding 
Respondent’s conduct.  The Department of Insurance did not sanction or penalize 
Respondent. 
{¶ 22} “3.  Counsel reviewed references to other matters described on 
Respondent’s web site and found that Respondent’s claims of expertise had been 
applied to matters in which he was involved as a party or where he was 
functioning in a non-litigation capacity, asserting claims arising under first party 
policies of insurance on property.  These activities are within the scope of his 
authority as a licensed Ohio Public Insurance Adjustor. 
{¶ 23} “4.  Upon commencement of formal Discovery in the instant case, 
Respondent contacted counsel for Relator and timely responded to documentary 
discovery requests.  Respondent promptly retained counsel who has confirmed 
that only one instance of representation of bodily injury claim has arguably 
occurred and that Respondent will cease and desist all other activities constituting 
the Unauthorized Practice of Law. 
{¶ 24} “5.  Respondent has also agreed to modify his company web site so 
that it explicitly states that he is not a lawyer and does not offer legal advice. 
{¶ 25} “6.  In view of Respondent’s cooperative attitude, the lack of any 
discernible financial gain, and the absence of cooperation by the involved ‘client,’ 
Relator does not recommend the imposition of a Civil Penalty. 
January Term, 2010 
5 
 
{¶ 26} “Consent Decree 
{¶ 27} “Based upon the foregoing, the following decree is [entered]: 
{¶ 28} “1.  By negotiating claims for bodily injury and soliciting 
employment in the negotiation of claims for extra contractual damages in Ohio, 
Terry Sershion and his alter ego, Fiduciary One LLC, engaged in the unauthorized 
practice of law. 
{¶ 29} “2.  Terry Sershion and Fiduciary One LLC, its successors and 
assigns, officers, members, agents, representatives, and employees are 
permanently enjoined from advertising, soliciting, or marketing advice regarding 
claims for personal injury. 
{¶ 30} “3.  Terry Sershion and Fiduciary One LLC, its successors and 
assigns, officers, members, agents, representatives, and employees are 
permanently enjoined from providing legal services or legal advice to Ohio 
residents or otherwise engaging in the unauthorized practice of law in the State of 
Ohio. 
{¶ 31} “4.  A civil penalty will not be imposed in this matter.  Respondent 
to bear all costs.” 
{¶ 32} Costs are taxed to respondents. 
So ordered. 
 
BROWN, 
C.J., 
and 
PFEIFER, 
LUNDBERG 
STRATTON, 
O’CONNOR, 
O’DONNELL, LANZINGER, and CUPP, JJ., concur. 
__________________ 
Brian N. Stretcher, Albert T. Brown Jr., and Maria C. Palermo, for relator. 
Montgomery, Rennie & Jonson, L.P.A., and George D. Jonson, for 
respondents. 
______________________