Title: Disciplinary Counsel v. Floyd

State: ohio

Issuer: Ohio Supreme Court

Document:

Office of Disciplinary Counsel v. Floyd. 
1 
[Cite as Disciplinary Counsel v. Floyd (1996), _____ Ohio St.3d ____.] 
2 
Attorneys at law -- Misconduct -- One-year suspension with sanction 
3 
held in abeyance and attorney placed on probation for two 
4 
years with conditions -- Neglecting an entrusted legal matter -- 
5 
Prejudicing or harming a client -- Engaging in conduct 
6 
adversely reflecting on fitness to practice law. 
7 
(No. 95-2532—Submitted January 24, 1996—Decided February 28, 1996.) 
8 
 
ON CERTIFIED REPORT by the Board of Commissioners on Grievances 
9 
and Discipline of the Supreme Court, No. 95-51. 
10 
 
In a two-count complaint filed on June 5, 1995, relator, Office of 
11 
Disciplinary Counsel, charged respondent, Dixie K. Floyd of Pataskala, Ohio, 
12 
Attorney Registration No. 0041110, with violations of DR 6-101(A)(3) 
13 
(neglecting an entrusted legal matter), DR 7-101(A)(3) (prejudicing or 
14 
damaging a client), and DR 1-102(A)(6) (engaging in conduct adversely 
15 
reflecting upon her fitness to practice law).  In her answer, respondent 
16 
admitted some facts alleged in the complaint, denied others, and added 
17 
explanations. 
18 
 
2
 
On November 16, 1995, a panel of the Board of Commissioners on 
1 
Grievances and Discipline of the Supreme Court (“board”) held a hearing on 
2 
the matter.  The complaint, answer, stipulations, and evidence established the 
3 
following. 
4 
 
Respondent was admitted to the Ohio Bar in 1988.  As to Count I, the 
5 
evidence indicates that Danny L. Jones retained respondent around April 
6 
1993 to represent him in Jones v. Chem. Mtge. Co., a case then pending in 
7 
federal court relating to an employment matter.  Respondent agreed to prepare 
8 
a petition for a writ of certiorari to the United States Supreme Court and 
9 
received $1,000 in fees, and later, $557.19, as a deposit for expenses and 
10 
costs, to do so. 
11 
 
Although the filing deadline for the petition was August 8, 1993, the 
12 
Clerk of the Supreme Court did not receive the petition until August 12, 1993, 
13 
and, therefore, refused to accept the petition for filing.  After respondent 
14 
received notice that the petition was out-of-time, she failed to fully advise her 
15 
client why the petition was rejected.  Upon inquiry by her client, Disciplinary 
16 
Counsel and others, respondent failed to fully disclose why the petition was 
17 
 
3
rejected.  As a result of respondent’s failure to meet the deadline, Jones was 
1 
unable to further pursue his claim. 
2 
 
As to Count II, in April 1994, respondent filed a divorce complaint on 
3 
behalf of a client, alleging numerous grounds, including adultery, extreme 
4 
cruelty, and gross neglect of duty.  In spite of the stated grounds and the 
5 
complex property determinations involved, respondent presented her client as 
6 
her sole witness at trial.  Because of the inadequacy of respondent’s 
7 
evidentiary presentation, the trial court dismissed the client’s complaint at the 
8 
close of his case and proceeded on the defendant’s counterclaim.  However, 
9 
because respondent failed to protect her client’s interests throughout the 
10 
hearing, the trial court granted a mistrial and advised relator of the 
11 
circumstances resulting in the mistrial. 
12 
 
At the panel’s November hearing, respondent acknowledged 
13 
responsibility for her violations.  She further indicated that following the 
14 
events described in Count I and because of the difficulties encountered in that 
15 
representation, she began to drink heavily; eventually, she recognized that she 
16 
was an alcoholic and needed treatment.  In the summer of 1995, she enrolled 
17 
 
4
in a three-week treatment program.  Since then, she attends weekly counseling 
1 
sessions and regularly attends Alcoholic Anonymous meetings. 
2 
 
As to Count II, respondent testified that she was following the requests 
3 
of her client, who wanted a divorce and was willing to give his wife 
4 
everything.  However, respondent agreed that she did not adequately 
5 
represent her client’s interests. 
6 
 
Consistent with the stipulations and the evidence, the panel concluded 
7 
that respondent’s conduct with respect to Counts I and II violated DR 6-
8 
101(A)(3), 7-101(A)(3) and 1-102(A)(6), as charged.  Relator and the panel 
9 
recommended that respondent be suspended from the practice of law for one 
10 
year, but that this suspension be stayed and respondent be placed on probation 
11 
for two years.  As conditions of probation, respondent is to  make restitution 
12 
to Jones in the amount of $1,557.19, remain free of all mood-altering 
13 
substances, enter into a contract with the Ohio Lawyers Assistance Program, 
14 
Inc. and follow all of its contract requirements.  The board adopted the 
15 
panel’s findings of fact, conclusions of law, and recommendation. 
16 
______________________________ 
17 
 
5
 
Geoffrey Stern, Disciplinary Counsel, and Alvin E. Mathews, Assistant 
1 
Disciplinary Counsel, for relator. 
2 
 
Dixie K. Floyd, pro se. 
3 
______________________________ 
4 
 
Per Curiam.  We concur with the board’s findings, conclusions of law, 
5 
and recommendation.  Accordingly, respondent is suspended from the 
6 
practice of law in Ohio for one year, but that suspension is held in abeyance 
7 
and respondent is placed on probation for two years upon the conditions 
8 
recommended by the board.  Restitution is to be made within ninety days from 
9 
this order.  Costs taxed to respondent. 
10 
Judgment accordingly. 
11 
 
MOYER, C.J., DOUGLAS, WRIGHT, RESNICK, F.E. SWEENEY and COOK, 
12 
JJ., concur. 
13 
 
PFEIFER, J., dissents and would publicly reprimand respondent. 
14 
 
15