Toledo Bar Assn. v. Farah

Annotate this Case

Download PDF

[Until this opinion appears in the Ohio Official Reports advance sheets, it may be cited as Toledo Bar Assn. v. Farah, Slip Opinion No. 2013-Ohio-3680.] NOTICE This slip opinion is subject to formal revision before it is published in an advance sheet of the Ohio Official Reports. Readers are requested to promptly notify the Reporter of Decisions, Supreme Court of Ohio, 65 South Front Street, Columbus, Ohio 43215, of any typographical or other formal errors in the opinion, in order that corrections may be made before the opinion is published. SLIP OPINION NO. 2013-OHIO-3680 TOLEDO BAR ASSOCIATION v. FARAH. [Until this opinion appears in the Ohio Official Reports advance sheets, it may be cited as Toledo Bar Assn. v. Farah, Slip Opinion No. 2013-Ohio-3680.] Attorneys Misconduct Neglecting an entrusted legal matter Failing to cooperate in a disciplinary investigation Indefinite suspension. (No. 2012-2119 Submitted February 27, 2013 Decided August 28, 2013.) ON CERTIFIED REPORT by the Board of Commissioners on Grievances and Discipline of the Supreme Court, No. 12-2119. ____________________ Per Curiam. {¶ 1} Respondent, Asad Sadallah Farah, Attorney Registration No. 0066174, whose last known address was in Temperance, Michigan, was admitted to the practice of law in Ohio in 1996. {¶ 2} On May 20, 2010, we suspended Farah from the practice of law in Ohio for one year, but stayed the entire suspension on the conditions that he submit to a mental-health evaluation conducted by the Ohio Lawyers Assistance Program ( OLAP ), comply with all of OLAP s treatment recommendations, and SUPREME COURT OF OHIO submit to one year of monitored probation pursuant to Gov.Bar R. V(9). Toledo Bar Assn. v. Farah, 125 Ohio St.3d 455, 2010-Ohio-2116, 928 N.E2d 1097. On November 1, 2011, we suspended respondent from the practice of law for his failure to register as an attorney for the 2011-2013 biennium. In re Attorney Registration Suspension of Farah, 130 Ohio St.3d 1420, 2011-Ohio-5627, 956 N.E.2d 310. And on March 8, 2013, in response to a certified report from the Board of Commissioners on Grievances and Discipline, we revoked Farah s probation, lifted the stay, and ordered him to serve the entire one-year suspension originally imposed in May 2010. Toledo Bar Assn. v. Farah, 134 Ohio St.3d 1479, 2013-Ohio-798, 984 N.E.2d 24. {¶ 3} In a two-count complaint certified to the board on June 11, 2012, relator, Toledo Bar Association, charged Farah with neglect of a client s legal matter and failure to cooperate in the resulting disciplinary investigation. {¶ 4} Attempts to serve the complaint on Farah by certified mail were not successful. Therefore, on July 9, 2012 the board served the complaint on the clerk of the Supreme Court in accordance with Gov.Bar R. V(11)(B). Farah failed to answer or otherwise respond to the complaint. Relator moved for default on August 31, 2012.1 {¶ 5} A master commissioner appointed by the board found, by clear and convincing evidence, that Farah had committed the charged misconduct and recommended that he be indefinitely suspended from the practice of law in Ohio, and that this suspension run consecutively to the one-year suspension we previously had imposed on Farah. The board adopted the master commissioner s findings of fact, conclusions of law, and recommended sanction. We adopt the board s report and indefinitely suspend Farah from the practice of law in Ohio 1 Because the formal complaint in this matter was certified to the board before August 1, 2012, the provisions of former Gov.Bar R. V(6) apply to this proceeding. See Gov.Bar R. XX(2)(LLLL). 2 January Term, 2013 and order that this suspension run consecutively to the one-year suspension imposed in our March 8, 2013 order. Misconduct {¶ 6} The evidence submitted with relator s motion for default shows that Karen Lynn Nelson retained Farah in the fall of 2010 and paid him $1,500 to assist her in reinstating her visitation rights with her granddaughter. Farah filed a show-cause motion to have Nelson s visitation reinstated, and he attended a pretrial hearing on her behalf. On June 16, 2011, the scheduled date for the trial, the parties appeared and advised the court that they had reached a settlement. The parties read the settlement agreement into the record and the court instructed Farah to submit a consent judgment entry by July 15, 2011. Farah failed to file the judgment entry, and on September 22, 2011, the court dismissed the matter. {¶ 7} Nelson avers that Farah never contacted her after the June 16, 2011 trial date, and that she was unable to reach him by phone, text, and personal appearance at his office. As a result of Farah s failure to submit the judgment entry to the court, Nelson had to retain new counsel and start the process anew. {¶ 8} Nelson filed a grievance with relator on November 3, 2011. Relator sent letters of inquiry to Farah at the address he registered with this court and another address discovered by relator, but those letters were returned by the postal service as undeliverable. Relator made several additional attempts to notify Farah of the grievance and the proposed complaint to be filed with the board, all of which failed. On May 11, 2012, relator sent Farah a copy of the cover letter and complaint it had sent to the board. {¶ 9} When the board s efforts to serve Farah by certified mail also failed, it obtained service on the clerk of this court. Farah has failed to answer the complaint or otherwise appear in this proceeding. {¶ 10} The master commissioner and board found that Farah s conduct violated Prof.Cond. R. 1.1 (requiring a lawyer to provide competent 3 SUPREME COURT OF OHIO representation to a client), 1.3 (requiring a lawyer to act with reasonable diligence in representing a client), 1.4(a)(3) (requiring a lawyer to keep the client reasonably informed about the status of a matter), 1.4(a)(4) (requiring a lawyer to comply as soon as practicable with reasonable requests for information from the client), and 8.1(b) (prohibiting a lawyer from knowingly failing to respond to a demand for information by a disciplinary authority during an investigation), and Gov.Bar R. V(4)(G) (requiring a lawyer to cooperate with a disciplinary investigation). {¶ 11} We adopt the board s findings of fact and misconduct. Sanction {¶ 12} When imposing sanctions for attorney misconduct, we consider relevant factors, including the ethical duties that the lawyer violated and the sanctions imposed in similar cases. Stark Cty. Bar Assn. v. Buttacavoli, 96 Ohio St.3d 424, 2002-Ohio-4743, 775 N.E.2d 818, ¶ 16. In making a final determination, we also weigh evidence of the aggravating and mitigating factors listed in BCGD Proc.Reg. 10(B). Disciplinary Counsel v. Broeren, 115 Ohio St.3d 473, 2007-Ohio-5251, 875 N.E.2d 935, ¶ 21. {¶ 13} The master commissioner and board found that two aggravating factors are present: Farah s prior disciplinary offense and his failure to cooperate in the disciplinary process. See BCGD Proc.Reg. 10(B)(1)(a) and (e). The record does not contain any evidence of mitigating factors. {¶ 14} In the motion for default judgment, relator observed that an attorney s neglect of entrusted legal matters combined with the failure to cooperate in the ensuing disciplinary investigation generally warrant an indefinite suspension from the practice of law. See, e.g., Akron Bar Assn. v. Snyder, 87 Ohio St.3d 211, 718 N.E.2d 1271 (1999), and Disciplinary Counsel v. Boykin, 82 Ohio St.3d 100, 694 N.E.2d 899 (1998). The master commissioner and board adopted relator s recommendation. Having considered Farah s conduct, the 4 January Term, 2013 aggravating factors present, and our precedent, we agree that an indefinite suspension is the appropriate sanction in this case. {¶ 15} Accordingly, Asad Sadallah Farah is indefinitely suspended from the practice of law in Ohio. This suspension shall run consecutively to the oneyear suspension imposed by this court in Toledo Bar Assn. v. Farah, 134 Ohio St.3d 1479, 2013-Ohio-798, 984 N.E.2d 24. Costs are taxed to Farah. Judgment accordingly. O CONNOR, C.J., and PFEIFER, O DONNELL, LANZINGER, KENNEDY, FRENCH, and O NEILL, JJ., concur. ____________________ Marshall & Melhorn, L.L.C., and John Borrell Jr.; Reminger & Co., L.P.A, and Laurie J. Avery; and Michael A. Bonfiglio, Bar Counsel, for relator. ________________________ 5

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.