Lorain County Bar Association et al.
Submitted March 6, 2019
Certified Report by the Board of Professional Conduct of the
Supreme Court, No. 2018-006.
Wickens Herzer Panza and Daniel A. Cook, for relator Lorain
County Bar Association.
J. Drexel, Disciplinary Counsel, and Lia J. Meehan, Assistant
Disciplinary Counsel, for relator Disciplinary Counsel.
Jeffrey H. Weir II, pro se.
1} Respondent, Jeffrey Hile Weir II, of Lorain,
Ohio, Attorney Registration No. 0067470, was admitted to the
practice of law in Ohio in 1997. In 2005, we briefly
suspended his license to practice law based on his failure to
timely register for the 2005-2007 biennium. In re
Attorney Registration Suspension of Weir, 107 Ohio St.3d
1431, 2005-Ohio-6408, 838 N.E.2d 671; In re Reinstatement
of Weir, 107 Ohio St.3d 1705, 2006-Ohio-13, 840 N.E.2d
2} In January 2018, the Lorain County Bar
Association ("LCBA") charged Weir with committing
professional misconduct in a single client matter. A few
months later, disciplinary counsel charged him with
misconduct in a separate client matter. The Board of
Professional Conduct considered both complaints together and
after a hearing, found that Weir had engaged in the charged
misconduct. The board recommends that we suspend him for one
year, with six months stayed on conditions. Weir objects to
the board's report and recommendation and urges us to
impose a fully stayed six-month suspension.
3} On March 1, 2019-after the parties had fully
briefed Weir's objections-we suspended Weir on an interim
basis after being notified that he had failed to answer a
third disciplinary complaint filed against him in an
unrelated matter. See Lorain Cty. Bar Assn. v. Weir,
___ Ohio St.3d, 2019-Ohio-728, ___ N.E.3d ___.
4} For the reasons explained below, we overrule
Weir's objections to the board's report and adopt the
recommended sanction, with one modification.
5} In December 2015, Jennifer Demyan retained Weir
to assist her in terminating a land-installment contract in
which she had agreed to purchase property in Grafton, Ohio.
Weir negotiated a settlement that cancelled the contract and
required the sellers to return a portion of Demyan's
deposit, minus the sellers' costs for repairing any
damages to the property. In February 2016, the sellers'
counsel sent Weir a check for $4, 983 to satisfy what the
sellers believed were their obligations under the settlement
6} Demyan, however, believed that she was entitled
to more money, and therefore neither she nor Weir attempted
to negotiate the check. But by June 2016, Demyan instructed
Weir to accept the money. Believing that the original check
had become stale, Weir returned the check to the sellers'
counsel and requested that the sellers issue a new one. On
August 18, 2016, Weir notified Demyan that he had received a