Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Kron Bar Association v. Dicato.

November 17, 2011

KRON BAR ASSOCIATION
v.
DICATO.



ON CERTIFIED REPORT by the Board of Commissioners on Grievances and Discipline of the Supreme Court, No. 10-093.

Per curiam.

[Until this opinion appears in the Ohio Official Reports advance sheets, it may be cited as Akron Bar Assn. v. DiCato,

Slip Opinion No. 2011-Ohio-5796.]

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. 2011-OHIO-5796 A

[Until this opinion appears in the Ohio Official Reports advance sheets, it may be cited as Akron Bar Assn. v. DiCato, Slip Opinion No. 2011-Ohio-5796.]

Attorney misconduct, including engaging in undignified or discourteous conduct that is degrading to a tribunal and knowingly or recklessly making false statements concerning the integrity of a judicial officer--Six-month suspension stayed on condition.

Submitted August 8, 2011

{¶1} Respondent, Edward Michael DiCato of Green, Ohio, Attorney Registration No. 0055350, was admitted to the practice of law in Ohio in 1991. On December 6, 2010, relator, Akron Bar Association, filed a complaint charging DiCato with a single count of misconduct arising from a telephone conversation with a judge's bailiff in which DiCato made disparaging remarks about the judge.

{¶2} Although DiCato provided written responses to relator's letters of inquiry, signed for a certified letter containing relator's notice of intent to file a complaint, and accepted service of the complaint, he failed to file an answer.

{¶3} Relator moved for default pursuant to Gov.Bar R. V(6)(F). A master commissioner appointed by the Board of Commissioners on Grievances and Discipline reviewed the evidence, made findings of misconduct and conclusions of law, and recommended that DiCato be suspended from the practice of law for six months, all stayed on the condition that he engage in no further misconduct. The board adopted the master commissioner's report in its entirety. We agree that DiCato engaged in undignified and discourteous conduct that was degrading to a tribunal by making a false statement, either intentionally or with reckless disregard for the truth, impugning the integrity of Judge Mary Margaret Rowlands. His conduct adversely reflects on his fitness to practice law and warrants the sanction recommended by the board.

Misconduct

{ΒΆ4} The evidence demonstrates that during a telephone conversation with Judge Rowlands's bailiff about fee applications that were awaiting the judge's approval, DiCato called the judge a lying, cheating bitch. As a result of DiCato's comments to the bailiff, Judge Rowlands issued an order directing him to appear and show cause why he should not be held in contempt of court. In an effort to resolve the conflict with the judge, DiCato sent her a letter offering an explanation for his conduct. In his ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.