| ► Secrecy: attorney/judge ethics complaints practiced by Ohio Supreme Court |
 |
 |
|
Secrecy re: attorney/judge ethics complaints practiced by Chief Justice Moyer and the Ohio Supreme Court
The Sandusky Register published an interesting editorial this date (ca.
  02/14/2010) titled “Register Viewpoint: State top court’s all lawyered up,” which can be found at the conclusion of this article.
This ol’ Dawg has repeatedly written on the Supreme Court’s ongoing charade in keeping “secret” ethics complaints filed against Ohio lawyers. Contrast this ongoing exercise in “hiding-the-ball” to the rules of the Oregon Supreme Court that allows anyone to review any and all ethics complaints filed against lawyers in that State.
The Sandusky Register further reported that Jonathan Coughlan, Chief of Ohio’s so-called attorney disciplinary system said that his office regularly (on a yearly basis) receives about 3,200 complaints. However, Mr. Coughlan states that only about 40 complaints are found to be valid.
This finding (40 out of 3,200) by Mr. Coughlan is an unmitigated farce. In fact, such a conclusion doesn’t pass the involuntary laugh test. Trust me folks, I could if necessary name at least 40 attorneys in Toledo, Columbus, Cincinnati and/or Cleveland that consistently (year after year, after year) have engaged in provable misconduct.
According to Mr. Coughlan and the Ohio Supreme Court, attorney ethics, honesty, integrity and competence in Ohio is analogous to the purity rating of Ivory Soap. Hmmm, do you believe it?
Disciplinary Counsel is repeatedly heard to mouth “our purpose is to protect Ohioans from unethical attorneys.” If this ad hominem, self-serving hyperbole were true, then why has Mr. Coughlan refused to disclose, by way of example (there’s many more), the fact that he and/or his minions have received at least twenty-five (25) ethics complaints in the past (ca. 1980-2009) in regards to Toledo attorney David R. Pheils, Jr.?
When do the rights of consumers of legal services in Ohio begin in contrast to the rights of someone like Mr. Pheils who Mr. Coughlan has chosen to protect from public scrutiny? Will Mr. Coughlan, Disciplinary Counsel and/or the Ohio Supreme Court accept personal responsibility for Ohioans wh
 were subsequently victimized by attorney David R. Pheils, Jr. and/or those associated with him?
I’m confident that prospective consumers seeking to employ an attorney in Ohio are up to the task of sorting the “wheat from the chaff” so to speak if given the opportunity to review any and all ethics complaints filed against Ohio lawyers. To suggest otherwise, would be akin to unduly labeling Ohioans as a group of intellectual dwarves who recently had their “umbilical chords detached.”
Patently, shouldn’t an Ohioan seeking to employ a neurosurgeon to perform brain surgery on a loved one, have unfettered access to any and all complaints filed with the medical board regarding the doctor’s past conduct? More importantly, shouldn’t the Ohio Medical Board be required to identify on its web site the court cases evidencing each time the physician was sued for malpractice, whether the outcome was favorable to the doctor? I believe they should be required to so act, how about you?
The ongoing excuses put forth by Ohio’s Disciplinary Counsel and/or their counterparts throughout the country in pursuing “total secrecy,” is that in doing so they are protecting the integrity of the legal profession. Give me a break! What integrity are these enablers/apologists speaking of I ask?
Conclusion
If the Legal Industry in Ohio was truly concerned about the public’s distrust of them, then they would not only welcome the “sunshine” alluded to by the editorial board at the Sandusky Register, Chief Justice Thomas Moyer would forthwith implement rules to accomplish this task.
As Yogi Berra was wont to say many years ago, the "Only thing we have to Fear, is Fear itself."
If Chief Justice Thomas Moyer and the Ohio Supreme Court were to so act, I’m confident that the Legal Industry in Ohio may well return to its glory days of yesteryear (1950s-1960s) when it was rightfully construed as an honorable profession by most Ohioans.
In so acting, Chief Justice Thomas Moyer who is truly concerned about his “legacy,” could cause other State Chief Justice’s to follow suit. That folks would truly be a legacy that Chief Justice Thomas J. Moyer could forever be rightfully proud of.
Sandusky Register - Sunday, February 14, 2010
Viewpoint: State top court's all lawyered up
Local and state officials regularly overlook the fine details of the state's Sunshine Laws, which are designed to guarantee open government. The state's court system not only encourages secrecy, it promotes it. Jonathan Coughlan, the high court's disciplinary counsel, recently said complaints to his office are made public only if the court investigates and certifies the complaint, a process that can take about eight months. Coughlan said the disciplinary counsel receives about 3,200 grievances a year. Only about 40 complaints make it to a formal filing. Based on that figure, the court policy appears to be to destroy, without comment or record, 3,160 complaints every year. The state's attorney general's office follows similar practices of withholding rather than releasing public documents to the public upon request. The governor's office, which has the authority to intervene, is steeped in tax and spend issues and slow to act on matters of corruption. State lawmakers don't seem capable of decisive action or leadership. In other words, we're up the creek without a paddle. The state's high court must reform itself and reverse its closed-door policy. The attorney general's office must do the same. Ohioans will not be served by either branch -- or any branch of government that lacks the courage to play straight with its constituents. |