Eaton Attorney Suspended
2009-1233. Disciplinary Counsel v. Siehl, Slip Opinion No. 2009-Ohio-5936.
On Certified Report by the Board of Commissioners on Grievances and Discipline, No. 08-089. Andrew Fraser Siehl, Attorney Registration No. 0065173, is indefinitely suspended from the practice of law in Ohio.
Moyer, C.J., and Pfeifer, Lundberg Stratton, O'Connor, O'Donnell, Lanzinger, and Cupp, JJ., concur.
Opinion: http://www.supremecourt.ohio.gov/rod/docs/pdf/0/2009/2009-Ohio-5936.pdf 
(Nov. 18, 2009) The Supreme Court of Ohio today indefinitely suspended the license of attorney Andrew F. Siehl of Eaton for abandoning the case of an incarcerated client he was appointed to represent in a postconviction appeal, then failing to respond to inquiries or otherwise cooperate with disciplinary authorities during the investigation of his misconduct.
The Court adopted findings by the Board of Commissioners on Grievances & Discipline that Siehl’s neglect of his client violated multiple provisions of the Rules of Professional Conduct including the disciplinary rules that require attorneys to act diligently in representing a client and comply with a client’s reasonable requests for information about his case, and that prohibit conduct prejudicial to the administration of justice and conduct that reflects adversely on an attorney’s fitness to practice.
The Court also agreed with the board’s finding that Siehl’s failure to respond to multiple written and in-person communications initiated by the Office of Disciplinary Counsel, or to comply with a subpoena ordering him to appear before disciplinary authorities, violated the state bar governance rule requiring attorneys to cooperate with all disciplinary proceedings.
Contacts
Jonathan E. Coughlan, 614.461.0256, for the Office of Disciplinary Counsel.
Andrew Siehl, pro se, 937.456.6818.
Please note: Opinion summaries are prepared by the Office of Public Information for the general public and news media. Opinion summaries are not prepared for every opinion released by the Court, but only for those cases considered noteworthy or of great public interest. Opinion summaries are not to be considered as official headnotes or syllabi of Court opinions. The full text of this and other Court opinions from 1992 to the present are available online from the Reporter of Decisions. In the Full Text search box, enter the eight-digit case number at the top of this summary and click "Submit."