Court Opinion

ID: 9803290
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-31 15:29:21.931745+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T10:03:00.599081
License: Public Domain

O’Donnell, J.,
dissenting.
*8Donald M. Scheetz, Senior Assistant Disciplinary Counsel, for relator.
{¶ 23} Respectfully, I dissent.
{¶ 24} The egregious conduct Pappas engaged in, particularly with respect to IRS agents, and his testimony before a grand jury and representations to the Department of Justice adversely affect the administration of justice.
{¶ 25} In this case, Pappas executed an affidavit, knowing that it would be filed in the Domestic Relations Division of the Franklin County Common Pleas Court, falsely claiming ownership in Aristotle Matsa’s law practice in an effort to quash a subpoena. He made false representations to relator, he falsely told IRS agents that he was the owner of Matsa’s law firm, he appeared before a federal grand jury and falsely testified under oath that he was the owner of Matsa’s law firm, and after that testimony, he sent a letter to the Department of Justice, representing again that he was the owner of Matsa’s law practice, that he had always been the sole shareholder of the firm, and that many of the entities listed on the subpoena were not associated with Matsa but were clients of his .law practice. After signing a confidential plea agreement with federal authorities, Pappas reported his misconduct to relator. A federal district court convicted him of making a false statement to federal authorities.
{¶ 26} In Disciplinary Counsel v. Fowerbaugh, 74 Ohio St.3d 187, 190, 658 N.E.2d 237 (1995), we stated that a
lawyer who engages in a material misrepresentation to a court * * * violates, at a minimum, the lawyer’s oath of office that he or she will not “knowingly * * * employ or countenance any * * * deception, falsehood, or fraud.” Gov.Bar R. I(8)(A). Such conduct strikes at the very core of a lawyer’s relationship with the court * * *. Respect for our profession is diminished with every deceitful act of a lawyer.
In this case, Pappas made repeated material misrepresentations.
{¶ 27} The board determined that he acted with a dishonest or selfish motive and that he engaged in a pattern of misconduct.
{¶ 28} In my view, a two-year suspension with no credit for time served under the interim felony suspension is not an appropriate sanction.
{¶ 29} I would disbar him from the practice of law.
*9Kegler Brown Hill & Ritter, Geoffrey Stern, and Rasheeda Khan, for respondent.