Akron Bar Assn. v. Williams
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
1 Akron Bar Association v. Williams. 2 [Cite as Akron Bar Assn. v. Williams (1996),____Ohio St.3d____.] 3 Attorneys at law -- Misconduct -- Public reprimand -- Withdrawing 4 from employment without taking reasonable steps to avoid 5 foreseeable prejudice to client and delivering all papers to 6 which client is entitled -- Neglect of an entrusted legal matter - 7 - Failing in a timely manner to respond to a court order, pay 8 the filing fee, and file the required notice of appeal and 9 appellant s brief. 10 11 12 13 14 (No. 96-1468 -- Submitted September 10, 1996 -- Decided December 18, 1996.) On Certified Report by the Board of Commissioners on Grievances and Discipline of the Supreme Court, No. 95-76. The Akron Bar Association ( relator ) filed a complaint on October 15 10, 1995, charging, inter alia, that Brian J. Williams of Akron, Ohio, 16 Attorney Registration No. 0020645 ( respondent ), had violated DR 2- 17 110(A)(2) (withdrawing from employment without taking reasonable steps 18 to avoid foreseeable prejudice to a client and delivering all papers to which 19 the client is entitled) and 6-101(A)(3) (neglect of a legal matter entrusted). 1 After respondent filed an answer to the complaint, relator and 2 respondent entered into a stipulation in which respondent agreed that he had 3 violated the above Disciplinary Rules. The matter was considered by a 4 panel of the Board of Commissioners on Grievances and Discipline of the 5 Supreme Court ( board ) upon the pleadings and agreed stipulations. 6 According to the stipulated facts, respondent filed a complaint in 7 April 1992 in the Ohio Court of Claims on behalf of Dethrow Jackson, but 8 did not pay the filing fee as required. In June 1992, the Court of Claims 9 dismissed the action for failure to pay the fee. After the filing fee was paid 10 and the case reinstated, respondent failed to file a Statement of Existence of 11 Connected Actions as had been ordered by the court in April 1992. Hence 12 the court again dismissed the case in April 1993. Respondent did not appeal 13 this dismissal, but filed a motion for reconsideration. When the court 14 denied the motion to reconsider, respondent filed an appeal from that 15 decision to the court of appeals. 16 Seven weeks after the appeal was filed, the court of appeals notified 17 respondent that although the record was filed, respondent had not filed his 18 Brief and Assignments of Error, nor had he requested an extension. 1 Respondent then requested an extension, which was granted. On November 2 9, 1993, the court of appeals dismissed the appeal for the reason that the 3 appeal was not timely filed. Respondent then refused to deliver Jackson s 4 file to him until Jackson paid the accumulated court costs. 5 6 7 The panel recommended that the respondent be publicly reprimanded. The board adopted the findings and the recommendation of the panel. _________________________ 8 R. David Briggs and James L. Wagner, for relator. 9 Brian J. Williams, pro se. 10 11 ________________________ Per Curiam. The respondent attorney has admitted to neglect of duty 12 owed to his client by failing in a timely manner to respond to a court order, 13 pay the filing fee, and file the required notice of appeal and appellant s 14 brief. We adopt the findings and recommendation of the board. 15 Respondent is hereby publicly reprimanded. Costs are taxed to respondent. 16 17 18 Judgment accordingly. MOYER, C.J., DOUGLAS, RESNICK, F.E. SWEENEY, PFEIFER, COOK and STRATTON, JJ., concur. 1
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
