Title: Cuyahoga Cty. Bar Assn. v. Stafford

State: ohio

Issuer: Ohio Supreme Court

Document:

[Cite as Cuyahoga Cty. Bar Assn. v. Gonzalez, 89 Ohio St.3d 470, 2000-Ohio-221.] 
 
 
 
 
CUYAHOGA COUNTY BAR ASSOCIATION v. GONZALEZ. 
CUYAHOGA COUNTY BAR ASSOCIATION v. STAFFORD. 
[Cite as Cuyahoga Cty. Bar Assn. v. Gonzalez (2000), 89 Ohio St.3d 470.] 
Attorneys at law — Misconduct — Public reprimand — While appearing in a 
professional capacity, engaging in undignified or discourteous conduct 
that is degrading to a tribunal. 
(Nos. 00-412 and 00-413 — Submitted April 26, 2000 — Decided August 16, 
2000.) 
ON CERTIFIED REPORT by the Board of Commissioners on Grievances and 
Discipline of the Supreme Court, No. 98-61. 
 
On April 2, 1999, relator, Cuyahoga County Bar Association, filed an 
amended complaint charging respondents Vincent Gonzalez, Attorney Registration 
No. 0008558, and Vincent Stafford, Attorney Registration No. 0059846, both of 
Cleveland, Ohio, with several violations of the Code of Professional 
Responsibility.  Respondents answered, and the matter was heard by a panel of the 
Board of Commissioners on Grievances and Discipline of the Supreme Court 
(“board”). 
 
The board found that in January 1998, respondents appeared in the chambers 
of Magistrate Barbara Porzio for the purpose of negotiations  before resuming trial 
 
2
on a domestic relations visitation schedule.  During a heated discussion, respondent 
Gonzalez called respondent Stafford “a piece of shit,” and Stafford responded by 
calling Gonzalez “a total asshole.”  These remarks and the demeanor of the 
respondents caused the magistrate to call for a court deputy.  The respondents left 
the magistrate’s chambers and walked into the courtroom, where they stood  chest 
to chest and continued to shout at each other. 
 
The panel concluded that by their conduct respondents violated DR 7-
106(C)(6) (in appearing in a professional capacity, a lawyer shall not engage in 
undignified or discourteous conduct which is degrading to a tribunal) and 
recommended that each respondent be publicly reprimanded.  The board adopted 
the findings, conclusions, and recommendations of the panel. 
__________________ 
 
Howard A. Shulman and Lester S. Potash, for relator. 
 
Wesley A. Dumas, for respondent Gonzalez. 
 
Charles W. Kettlewell, for respondent Stafford. 
__________________ 
 
Per Curiam.  We adopt the findings, conclusions, and recommendations of 
the board.  Respondent Gonzalez and respondent Stafford are hereby publicly 
reprimanded.  Costs of these proceedings are taxed equally to each respondent. 
Judgment accordingly. 
 
3
 
MOYER, C.J., DOUGLAS, RESNICK, F.E. SWEENEY, PFEIFER, COOK and 
LUNDBERG STRATTON, JJ., concur.