Title: In re Application of Lynch

State: ohio

Issuer: Ohio Supreme Court

Document:

[Cite as In re Application of Lynch, 116 Ohio St.3d 187, 2007-Ohio-6044.] 
 
 
 
IN RE APPLICATION OF LYNCH. 
[Cite as In re Application of Lynch, 116 Ohio St.3d 187, 2007-Ohio-6044.] 
Attorneys – Character and fitness – Substance abuse and criminal offenses weigh 
against approval of application for admission to bar – Applicant may 
reapply to take later bar examination. 
(No. 2007-1416 – Submitted October 9, 2007 – Decided November 15, 2007.) 
ON REPORT by the Board of Commissioners on Character and Fitness of the 
Supreme Court, No. 359. 
__________________ 
 
Per Curiam. 
{¶ 1} Applicant, Eugene Joseph Lynch of Mayfield Village, Ohio, 
graduated from Case Western Reserve Law School in May 2007.  Lynch filed an 
application to take the July 2007 bar examination, updating his candidacy as 
required by Gov.Bar R. I(3). 
{¶ 2} The Joint Admissions Committee of the Cuyahoga County and 
Cleveland Bar Associations conducted a character-and-fitness interview and 
recommended that Lynch be approved for admission with the qualification that he 
enter a 12-step program to address his use of alcohol and its relationship to his 
professional responsibilities.  The underlying reason for the qualification was the 
admissions committee’s concern with Lynch’s lack of remorse and personal 
responsibility for two separate alcohol-related offenses: an assault conviction and 
a conviction for attempted disorderly conduct. 
{¶ 3} After the joint admissions committee issued its recommendation, 
Lynch appealed to the Board of Commissioners on Character and Fitness.  See 
Gov.Bar R. I(12).  The board appointed a panel to review Lynch’s qualifications.  
The panel heard the cause on June 21, 2007, and unanimously recommended that 
SUPREME COURT OF OHIO 
2 
Lynch not be approved to take the July 2007 bar examination.  The panel 
recommended that Lynch be allowed to reapply to take the July 2008 bar 
examination, when his compliance with his Ohio Lawyers Assistance Program 
(“OLAP”) contract would be reviewed.  The board adopted the panel’s report. 
The Board’s Findings 
{¶ 4} On June 4, 2004, police in Baltimore, Maryland, arrested Lynch 
for carrying a deadly weapon with the intent to injure and second-degree assault. 
{¶ 5} In his application materials, Lynch described this incident as a “bar 
fight.”  However, during the panel hearing Lynch revealed that the “bar fight” had 
involved his striking of another patron in the head with a beer bottle.  Lynch told 
the panel that his victim had jumped ahead of the line to use the restroom and then 
pushed Lynch from behind when Lynch protested.  Lynch testified that he did not 
regret defending himself but does regret injuring his victim. 
{¶ 6} The police report indicated that the victim told officers that it was 
Lynch who had jumped ahead of him in line and struck the victim with a beer 
bottle when the victim protested.  The victim was subsequently transported to the 
hospital to receive stitches in his head.  Lynch ultimately entered a plea to the 
assault, received probation before judgment, and served a one-year probationary 
period. 
{¶ 7} In a second incident on March 17, 2006, Lynch left a bar in 
Lyndhurst, Ohio, and tried to reenter to pay his bar tab but was turned away by 
police.  When he tried to reenter a second time, police arrested him after he 
became agitated and swore at the officers.  Police charged Lynch with disorderly 
conduct, but he entered a no-contest plea to a lesser charge of attempted 
disorderly conduct. 
{¶ 8} Lynch’s record also contains two underage-drinking citations from 
approximately ten years ago.  Lynch described his drinking habits as going to a 
bar twice a week and drinking approximately six alcoholic beverages in a four-
January Term, 2007 
3 
hour period.  Lynch was assessed at Glenbeigh Hospital and diagnosed as 
alcohol-dependent.  On June 12, 2007, Lynch entered into a two-year contract 
with OLAP.  He is also receiving intensive outpatient treatment at Glenbeigh.  
The board noted that Lynch is in denial about his alcoholism but that he is doing 
the right things and seems committed to the program. 
Review 
{¶ 9} Lynch 
does 
not 
challenge 
the 
board’s 
findings 
and 
recommendation.  We have reviewed the board’s record and its report, and we 
agree with the board’s findings and recommendation.  Lynch’s existing 
dependence on alcohol and his pattern of disregarding the law convince us that he 
does not yet possess the requisite character, fitness, and moral qualifications 
under Gov.Bar R. I(11) to be admitted to the bar.  We find that Lynch needs 
further time to show that he has overcome his alcohol dependency and is 
managing his condition with sufficient treatment and counseling.  See In re 
Application of Olterman, 106 Ohio St.3d 383, 2005-Ohio-5324, 835 N.E.2d 370, 
and In re Application of Ralls, 109 Ohio St.3d 487, 2006-Ohio-2996, 849 N.E.2d 
36.  Therefore, we disapprove Lynch for admission at this time but order that he 
may reapply for the July 2008 bar examination, provided that he then 
demonstrates continued compliance with his OLAP contract. 
Judgment accordingly. 
 
MOYER, 
C.J., 
and 
PFEIFER, 
LUNDBERG 
STRATTON, 
O’CONNOR, 
O’DONNELL, LANZINGER, and CUPP, JJ., concur. 
__________________ 
 
Ray, Robinson, Carle & Davies and Julia R. Brouhard, for Cuyahoga 
County and Cleveland Bar Associations. 
 
Eugene J. Lynch, pro se. 
______________________