Stark County Bar Ass'n v. Hare
99 Ohio St. 3d 310 (2003)
Premium Feature
Subscribe to Lexplug to listen to the Case Podcast.
Rule of Law:
An attorney who engages in multiple acts of professional misconduct, including charging excessive fees, failing to disclose financial transactions in adoption proceedings, creating false documents, misleading clients and the court, and commingling client funds, will face severe discipline, typically disbarment, especially when exhibiting a lack of remorse or attempts to conceal misconduct.
Facts:
- In April 2000, David B. Hare, representing a birth mother who was his former client, offered to arrange an adoption for her unborn twins despite having no prior adoption experience.
- Hare offered to pay the birth mother for time off work, medical bills, and other expenses, subsequently issuing checks totaling $2,889 for her rent, vehicle inspection, a daughter's trip, and living expenses.
- Hare interviewed prospective adoptive parents, charging them a $1,500 nonrefundable retainer and advising that the twins' adoptions would cost $50,000 in legal fees plus $10,000 for the birth mother's medical expenses.
- The prospective adoptive parents paid Hare a total of $61,500, which Hare later admitted he deposited into his personal accounts instead of a client trust account.
- Hare filed preliminary and final estimated accountings in probate court, which falsely represented that no disbursements had been made to the birth mother and omitted the $60,000 he received from the adoptive parents.
- Hare transferred the title of a 1993 Oldsmobile, which he said was worth $6,000, to the birth mother and filed a notice of satisfaction for a $2,300 judgment he had against her.
- At a final adoption hearing, the birth mother withdrew her consent, citing unpaid medical bills and lack of trust in Hare, and the adoptive parents disclosed the undisclosed $60,000 payment to the probate judge.
- The probate judge vacated the temporary placement of the twins, placing them in emergency care with Medina County Job and Family Services, and continued the hearing due to the undisclosed, patently improper payment.
Procedural Posture:
- Relator, Stark County Bar Association, filed a complaint against respondent, David B. Hare, with the Board of Commissioners on Grievances and Discipline.
- A panel appointed by the Board heard the cause, making findings of fact, conclusions of law, and recommending disbarment for multiple Disciplinary Rule violations.
- The Board of Commissioners on Grievances and Discipline adopted the panel's findings of misconduct and its recommendation for disbarment.
Premium Content
Subscribe to Lexplug to view the complete brief
You're viewing a preview with Rule of Law, Facts, and Procedural Posture
Issue:
Does an attorney's conduct in charging excessive fees, failing to disclose financial transactions, creating false accountings, commingling client funds, and misleading clients and the court in adoption proceedings, coupled with a lack of remorse, warrant disbarment?
Opinions:
Majority - Per Curiam
Yes, an attorney's extensive misconduct including excessive fees, failure to disclose, creation of false documents, commingling funds, and misleading clients and the court in adoption proceedings, especially when compounded by a lack of remorse and attempts to conceal evidence, warrants disbarment. The Ohio Supreme Court agreed with the Board's findings that David B. Hare violated multiple Disciplinary Rules (DR). Hare charged a clearly excessive fee of $50,000 for adoptions, whereas evidence indicated local attorneys charged hourly rates yielding total fees of $2,000 to $3,000. He created conflicts of interest by making improper payments to the birth mother and failing to disclose these to the adoptive parents. He also acquired an improper proprietary interest and provided improper financial assistance by paying the birth mother's personal expenses and giving her a car, neither of which constituted permissible advances of court costs or litigation expenses. Critically, Hare knowingly failed to disclose required information and made false statements in probate court filings by concealing the true fees and payments. He also counseled clients in illegal or fraudulent conduct by persuading them to sign false accounts and advising them not to discuss money with opposing counsel or the court. Finally, he violated rules by depositing client funds, including unearned fees and funds intended for medical expenses, into his personal accounts instead of a separate trust account. The court emphasized that deliberately falsifying documents in a judicial proceeding to conceal exorbitant fees is "manifestly contrary to the professional qualities of honesty, justice, and good character," citing Disciplinary Counsel v. Bell (1984). Unlike the attorney in Bell, Hare failed to acknowledge the gravity and exploitive effect of his misconduct, instead attempting to evade responsibility, blame others, and fabricate incredible explanations, which further supported the severe sanction of disbarment.
Analysis:
This case reaffirms the severe consequences for attorneys who engage in pervasive dishonesty, particularly when preying on vulnerable clients in sensitive matters like adoption. It underscores the critical importance of transparency, ethical fee structures, and strict adherence to fiduciary duties, including the proper handling of client funds. Future cases will likely cite Stark County Bar Assn. v. Hare to justify disbarment for attorneys who exhibit a pattern of deceit, conflicts of interest, and disregard for legal and ethical disclosure requirements, especially when a lack of remorse or attempts at concealment are evident. It sets a high standard for attorney conduct, emphasizing that the integrity of the legal profession depends on honest dealings with clients and the court.
