Title: In re Application of Kantor

State: ohio

Issuer: Ohio Supreme Court

Document:

In re Application of Kantor. 
1 
[Cite as In re Application of Kantor (1997), ______Ohio St.3d ______.] 
2 
Attorneys at law -- Application to register as candidate for admission 
3 
to the practice of law -- Application denied when applicant fails 
4 
to prove his character and fitness to practice law -- Applicant 
5 
may reapply for admission to take the July 1997 bar 
6 
examination subject to second complete character and fitness 
7 
investigation. 
8 
 
(No. 97-413 -- Submitted March 31, 1997 -- Decided June 18, 1997.) 
9 
 
ON CERTIFIED REPORT of the Board of Commissioners on Character 
10 
and Fitness of the Supreme Court, No. 150. 
11 
 
In January 1996, Matthew Kantor of Columbus (“applicant”) 
12 
registered for admission to the practice of law in Ohio and in April 1996 
13 
applied to take the July 1996 bar examination.  Two members of the 
14 
Columbus Bar Association Admissions Committee (“committee”) 
15 
interviewed the applicant and concluded that he did not possess the 
16 
qualifications required for admission to the practice of law.  Two other 
17 
committee members conducted another interview and likewise concluded 
18 
that the applicant did not possess the necessary qualifications.  The 
19 
committee then filed a report with the Board of Commissioners on 
20 
 
2
Character and Fitness of the Supreme Court (“board”) and recommended 
1 
that applicant not be approved for admission to the practice of law. 
2 
Applicant appealed the committee’s recommendation, and a hearing was 
3 
held in January 1997 before a panel of the board. 
4 
 
The panel received evidence with respect to applicant’s employment 
5 
as a legal assistant with a Columbus, Ohio law firm, events leading to his 
6 
termination from that firm, and the manner in which he described these 
7 
events on his application for bar admission.  Specifically, the panel received 
8 
evidence about the applicant’s keeping of time sheets, his attitude toward 
9 
the tasks assigned to him, his tardy filing of documents with the court, and 
10 
the quality of his work.  There was further evidence that applicant had 
11 
falsely answered a question on his admissions application.  Two panel 
12 
members concluded that the applicant had the present character, fitness and 
13 
moral qualifications for admission to the practice of law in Ohio and 
14 
recommended that he be permitted to take the February 1997 Ohio Bar 
15 
examination.  One panel member concluded that because of applicant’s false 
16 
statement on his application, his failure to provide certain other information 
17 
during the application review process, his involvement in acts of dishonesty, 
18 
 
3
and his demonstrated lack of diligence and neglect of professional 
1 
obligations, applicant was not presently qualified to take the bar 
2 
examination and recommended that applicant not be allowed to sit for the 
3 
examination before July 1997. 
4 
 
The board adopted the findings of the dissenting panel member and 
5 
recommended that the current application of the applicant be disapproved, 
6 
that the applicant be permitted to reapply to take the July 1997 bar 
7 
examination, and that upon reapplication, the applicant be required to 
8 
submit to a second complete character and fitness investigation. 
9 
______________________________________ 
10 
 
Keith McNamara and Michael R. Moran, for Columbus Bar 
11 
Association Admissions Committee. 
12 
 
Charles W. Kettlewell, for applicant. 
13 
_______________________________________ 
14 
 
Per Curiam.  We accept the board’s findings, conclusions and 
15 
recommendations.  Applicant is hereby authorized to reapply for 
16 
authorization to take the July 1997 bar examination.  Costs of these 
17 
proceedings are taxed to the applicant. 
18 
 
4
 
 
 
 
 
 
Judgment accordingly. 
1 
 
MOYER, C.J., DOUGLAS, RESNICK, F.E. SWEENEY and PFEIFER, JJ., 
2 
concur. 
3 
 
COOK and LUNDBERG STRATTON, JJ., dissent and would require 
4 
applicant to wait and reapply for the July 1998 bar examination. 
5