Document: 390 U.S. 544 88 S.Ct. 1222 20 L.Ed.2d 117 In the Matter of John RUFFALO, Jr., Petitioner. No. 73. Argued March 4, 1968. Decided April 8, Rehearing Denied May 27, See 391 961, 1833. Craig Spangenberg, Cleveland, Ohio, for petitioner. Thomas V. Koykka, Ohio State and Mahoning County Bar Assns. Mr. Justice DOUGLAS delivered opinion Court. 1 Petitioner was ordered indefinitely suspended from practice law by Supreme Court on two findings alleged misconduct. Ass'n v. Ruffalo, 176 St. 263, 199 N.E.2d 396. That order became final is not here review. The Federal District Court, after ordering petitioner to show cause why he should be disbarred, found that there no re 249 F.Supp. 432 (D.C.N.D.Ohio). Appeals likewise stricken roll court basis Ohio's disbarment order. majority held while one charges might justify discipline, other did; it disbarred in 370 F.2d 447 (C.A.6th Cir.). dissenting judge thought neither charge justified suspension practice.1 Id., at 460. case a writ certiorari. 389 815, 30, 19 66. 2 an active trial lawyer who handled many Employers' Liability Act cases. Association American Railroads investigated his handling claims referred impropriety President also local counsel Baltimore & Railroad Co. 432, 435, n. 3. then filed against 3 state proceedings, upon which decision relied (see Rule 6(3) United States Sixth Circuit), Board Commissioners Grievances Discipline originally charged with 12 counts Charges Nos. 4 5 accused soliciting FELA plaintiffs as clients through agent, Michael Orlando. At hearings followed, both Orlando testified did solicit but merely cases him. It brought out some Orlando's investigations involved where employer, Railroad, defendant. Immediately hearing this testimony, Board, third day hearings, added 13 based hiring investigate own employer. Counsel objected, stating: 'Oh, I object very highly. There nothing morally wrong legally it. * When does end these amendments come? mean last minute you are here, (counsel county Association) may bring another amendment. think gentleman (petitioner) has right know beforehand what him heard those charges.' Motion strike denied, gave continuance have time respond new charge. guilty seven misconduct, including 13. On review, evidence sufficient sustain only charges, them being 13, concluded violations required disbarment. acted reads follows: 6 'That Respondent conspire one, Orlando, paid said moneys preparing lawsuits B. O. employer during all periods extending 1957 July 1961, well knowing deceptive its nature respects employee, toward Company.' 7 Through admission before federal derivative membership bar, result automatic court. Though action entitled respect, conclusively binding courts. Theard States, 354 278, 281—282, 77 1274, 1276, 1342. 8 Petitioner, cases, hired railroad man help He night-shift car inspector ever yard worked inspector. company time. had access confidential information; claim revealed secret matters or breached any trust. clear record chose because knew railroading. 9 One guidepost field contained § 10 Act, amended, 53 Stat. 1404, 45 U.S.C. 60, enacted encourage employees common carriers furnish information 'to person interest,' facts incident injury death employee.2 however, 'one believes proper employ pay work interests regular qualified member Bar.' St., 269, N.E.2d, 401. 11 We urged hold petitioner's efforts conceal employment relationship likelihood conflict interest require courts respect within range discretion. do pursue inquiry. Nor we stop inquire whether proceeding defective Association, agency made petitioner, headed several claims. For issue dispositive requires reversal. As noted, (No. 13) stands original additional added. Thereafter, relating taken. Rather, bar association said: 14 'We will stipulate far concerned, introduce support Specification statements Ruffalo open testimony Mike witness stand. Those 13.' 15 de novo Appeals. rested court's findings: 16 us, reviewed, entire developed dispose matter primarily disciplined Ruffalo. dispute. consider find insupportable Court's determination such disclosed unprofessional conduct warranting discipline imposed they warrant similar us.' F.2d, 449. proceeded analyze 'admitted Charge 13' ruling facts. 450—452. 17 If constitutional defects concerning reflected decided. stated: 18 'Such infirmity proof established want (Ruffalo's) fair private professional character' lead us conviction cannot, consistent our duty, 'accept conclusion' bar.' 453. turn question procedure lack due process. Disbarment, designed protect public, punishment penalty lawyer. Ex parte Garland, Wall. 333, 380, L.Ed. 366; Spevack Klein, 385 511, 515, 87 625, 628, 574. accordingly procedural process, includes notice Oliver, 333 257, 273, 68 499, 507, 92 682. Randall Brigham, 523, 540, 285, when proceedings 'not taken occurring court, presence judges, given attorney opportunity afforded explanation defence.' Therefore, conditions considers determining followed 'the wanting process.' Selling Radford, 243 46, 51, 37 377, 379, 61 585. 21 present would considered offense until length material pertaining phase case. Judge Edwards, below, said, procedral violation process never pass muster normal civil criminal litigation.'3 462. 22 These adversary quasi-criminal nature. Cf. Gault, 387 1, 33, 1428, 1446, 527. must known commence. They become trap when, underway, amended accused. can expunge earlier start afresh.4 23 How been met included leveled knows. 24 This absence reach grievance precise deprived 25 Reversed. 26 BLACK, reasons stated others, agrees judgment opinion. 27 STEWART took part 28 HARLAN, concurring result. 29 see need decide formed subsequent adequate afford proceedings. 1342, leaves free hold, would, accepted purposes basis, concur 30 WHITE, whom MARSHALL joins, 31 reverses Circuit inadequate prior bringing proceeding. disbarment, us. denied petition certiorari seeking review Ass'n, 379 931, 85 328, 342 (1964). Our instant extends Circuit. therefore so infected justice reversal determination. 32 answering into place obligated determine itself attorney's grievous 1342 (1957). asked 'show if Court.' response brief. brief also, urging argued orally panel 33 oral argument, take determinations fact full assert accurately determined conduct—and assert, wished so, late point learned employing ground prejudiced factual disputing lower conclusions, objection.1 Instead agreed were reaching conclusion property weight views judges passed issue. put contrary view. conclude defect supports Appeals, asserted since raised below properly am constrained deal central questions posed case, making independent fitness remain mandated supra, disbar having employee relevant damage suits retained represent them. satisfied duty except that, under principles justice, (it is) do.' 585 (1917). 34 A inquiry appraising rolls deemed condemn removed. provided members general standard disbarment: 35 'When shown record, unbecoming forthwith mailed him, unless shows good 40 days thereafter, further court.' 6(3), Circuit.2 36 Even unspecific assumed certain kinds conduct, generally condemned responsible men, grounds class certainly offenses traditionally malum se. attorneys recognize improper profession. how, ever, characterized. Some attorneys, like refused Northern (1965), undoubtedly worker, knowledge experience select appraise facts, 'moonlight'—work collecting data. hand some, officials Associations, believe encouraging arguably odds chief employer's unethical. appraisal about reasonable men differ, immediately apparent scrupulous citizen confronts question.3 deprive profession unethical differ propriety conduct. express code specific rules could proscribe disbarred. After disbarring deferred pending 'abiding conviction' finding correct orderly administration defer 60 provides part: 'Any contract, rule, regulation, device whatsoever, purpose, intent, effect shall prevent carrier furnishing voluntarily void, whoever, threat, intimidation, order, attempt interest, whoever discharges otherwise disciplines attempts shall, thereof, punished fine more than $1,000 imprisoned year, imprisonment, each offense: Provided, herein construed void regulation files carrier, privileged reports.' 15(a) Rules Civil Procedure, 'A party amend pleading once course responsive served or, permitted placed calendar, served. Otherwise leave written consent adverse party; freely requiries.' amici curiae argue months argument overlooks serious prejudice occurred content specifications lulled 'into false sense security' (Bouie City Columbia, 378 347, 352, 84 1697, 1702, 894) rebut investigator rather solicitor clients. posture 'no reason even suspect' (ibid.) doing be, irrevocably assuring yet made. Indeed, suggest reversal, too apply rule literally: preliminarily observe read automatically striking name record. keeping requirements admonitions decisions forbid Courts From acting total reliance judgment. dispute.' 447, 449 (1966) (note omitted). points out, appraised employed worked, time, information.

Category: 5