Former Dayton Attorney Indefinitely Suspended
2009-1231. Dayton Bar Assn. v. Brown, Slip Opinion No. 2009-Ohio-6424.
On Certified Report by the Board of Commissioners on Grievances and Discipline, No. 08-077. Keith J. Brown, Attorney Registration No. 0025640, 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-6424.pdf 
View oral argument video of this case.
(Dec. 15, 2009) The Supreme Court of Ohio today indefinitely suspended the license of former Dayton attorney Keith J. Brown, currently residing in Indiana, for neglecting legal matters entrusted to him by two clients and subsequently failing to respond to inquiries or otherwise cooperate with disciplinary authorities during the investigation and prosecution of his misconduct.
The Court voted 7-0 to adopt findings by the Board of Commissioners on Grievances & Discipline that Brown neglected estate planning and property transfer transactions for which he had accepted fee advances, and falsely notarized signature lines on legal documents that his clients had not yet signed. The Court agreed that Brown’s acts and omissions were in violation of the state attorney discipline rules that prohibit neglect; conduct involving fraud, deceit dishonesty or misrepresentation; conduct prejudicial to the administration of justice and conduct that adversely reflects on an attorney’s fitness to practice law.
The Court also agreed with the board’s finding that by failing to respond to multiple written notices and other attempts to communicate with him by the Dayton Bar Association, or to cooperate with the disciplinary board during the prosecution of the complaint against him, Brown violated the state bar governance rule that requires attorneys to cooperate with all disciplinary proceedings.
In imposing an indefinite suspension as the appropriate sanction for his misconduct, the Court wrote: “A lawyer’s indifference toward the process of discipline within the legal profession is entirely unacceptable. Indeed, we have held that an indefinite suspension from the practice of law ‘is especially fitting ... [where] neglect of a legal matter is coupled with a failure to cooperate in the ensuing disciplinary investigation.’ ... The single mitigating factor that a lawyer has no previous disciplinary record does not warrant a departure from this rule.”
Contacts
David M. Rickert, 937.223.6003, for the Dayton Bar Association.
Keith J. Brown, pro se. No current phone contact information available.
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."
Requires the free Adobe Flash Player.View system requirements, download instructions, and download the free Adobe Flash Player.