Opinion ID: 2633144
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: Conduct Which Would Potentially Gives Rise to Sanctions.

Text: ¶ 17 Had this cause come before us in the guise of a complaint, rather than an application for readmittance, DeBacker's actions could be regarded as sanctionable misrepresentation. [17] After the petitioner passed the bar examination and was entered on the Roll of Attorneys, he relied upon his Oklahoma and/or Kansas license to maintain his Ohio registration. When his Oklahoma and Kansas membership lapsed, he continued to represent to Ohio that he was licensed in Oklahoma and Kansas, but at no time did he make any attempt to verify his membership in either state. The petitioner became concerned with his bar membership only after an investigative reporter contacted him regarding his credentials. ¶ 18 Attorneys admitted to practice law in Oklahoma are part of the judicial system of Oklahoma and act as officers of its courts. [18] Membership of the association consists of persons who are, and remain, licensed to practice law in this State. [19] There are three categories of Bar Association members: 1) active; 2) senior; and 3) associate. [20] Inactive members of the Bar Association may not practice law. [21] Furthermore, Bar Association members may not shroud themselves in titles placing them beyond the powers of this Court. [22] ¶ 19 The attorney should have been aware of his status or at least on notice that he was not in compliance with the Bar Association Rules. He presumed he was a member of the Oklahoma Bar Association, but never paid dues required for membership after 1980. Everyone is presumed to know the law. [23] Furthermore, attorneys are charged with the responsibility to understand the limits law places on their authority. [24] Even without actual notice of his suspension, the attorney was not justified in assuming he was a member, nor was he justified in relying on his assumed membership to practice law in another state. DeBacker was not a member in good standing of any bar association and he misrepresented his status. ¶ 20 The general public should be protected from attorney misrepresentations. [25] An attorney need not engage in inherently sinister activity to be the subject of discipline. [26] Rather, any act contrary to prescribed standards of conduct, whether in the course of professional capacity or otherwise, which brings discredit upon the legal profession may result in disciplinary action. [27] Licensed lawyers present themselves to the public as persons worthy in the performance of all professional activities. [28] An attorney whose name is stricken from the membership rolls ceases to be a member of the Oklahoma Bar Association. [29] ¶ 21 Having been notified that DeBacker had been representing himself as registered in Ohio based on his licensure in Oklahoma, the General Counsel of the Bar or the Professional Responsibility tribunal could have filed disciplinary proceedings against the attorney. However, we are mindful that while DeBacker was without a doubt negligent regarding his Oklahoma license, his oversight was not intentional. Furthermore, when notified of his neglectful behavior, he immediately self-suspended from the practice of law and reported himself to the Ohio Supreme Court. These factors reflect his moral character.