Disciplinary Counsel v. Phillips
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
1 Office of Disciplinary Counsel v. Phillips. 2 [Cite as Disciplinary Counsel v. Phillips (1997), _____Ohio St.3d ____.] 3 Attorneys at law -- Misconduct -- One-year suspension reinstated -- 4 Failure to comply with conditions of probation of previous 5 disciplinary proceeding. 6 (No. 94-1810 -- Submitted January 22, 1997 -- Decided April 30, 7 8 9 10 1997.) ON CERTIFIED REPORT of the Board of Commissioners on Grievances and Discipline of the Supreme Court, No. 93-86. On December 7, 1994, we suspended respondent, Thomas Ewing 11 Phillips of Chillicothe, Ohio, Attorney Registration No. 0008582, from the 12 practice of law for one year, with that one year stayed, and we placed 13 respondent on probation for two years on the following conditions: (a) that 14 an attorney appointed by Disciplinary Counsel, relator, monitor 15 respondent s law office and practice and management for these two years, 16 (b) that respondent attend twelve hours of continuing legal education in law 17 office management in addition to the twenty-four hours of CLE he is 18 required to complete by December 31, 1996, (c) that respondent enter into a 19 contract with the Ohio Lawyers Assistance Program ( OLAP ) and abide by 1 its terms for a minimum of the next two years, and (d) that no disciplinary 2 complaints be certified to the Board of Commissioners on Grievances and 3 Discipline ( board ) by a probable cause panel within the next two years. 4 Disciplinary Counsel v. Phillips (1994), 71 Ohio St.3d. 98, 642 N.E.2d 344. 5 On February 16, 1996, respondent pled guilty to the misdemeanor of 6 having an open container of beer or intoxicating liquor in a motor vehicle. 7 By April 17, 1996, respondent had not yet participated in the Ohio 8 Lawyers s Assistance Program, and on June 17, 1996, a probable cause 9 panel of the board certified a formal complaint filed by relator alleging that 10 respondent violated five Disciplinary Rules and one Rule for the 11 Governance of the Bar. Based on these facts relator filed an Amended 12 Petition for Revocation of Probation on June 25, 1996. On October 10, 13 1996, pursuant to Gov.Bar R.V(9)(I), this court revoked respondent s 14 probation and reinstated his original one-year suspension pending the 15 issuance of a final order. 16 A panel of the board held a hearing on this matter on July 19, 1996. 17 Witnesses included Carl Jones, one of respondent s monitoring attorneys, 18 William Haase, Director of OLAP, Dr. Richard O. Pelham, Clinical Director 2 1 of OLAP, Jeanie Phillips, respondent s former wife, and respondent. On the 2 basis of the evidence, the panel found that respondent had not entered into 3 a contract with the OLAP, and by his own admission had used alcohol 4 during his period of probation. The panel also found that on June 17, 1996, 5 a certified disciplinary complaint was filed against the respondent. 6 The panel recommended that respondent s two-year probation be 7 revoked and that the order of December 7, 1994 suspending respondent for 8 one year be reinstated with no probation. 9 10 11 12 _______________________________________ Geoffrey Stern, Disciplinary Counsel, and Sally Ann Steuck, Assistant Disciplinary Counsel for relator. Thomas Ewing Phillips, pro se. 13 _______________________________________ 14 Per Curiam. We adopt the findings and recommendations of the 15 panel and hereby suspend respondent from the practice of law in Ohio for a 16 period of one year from the date of this order. Costs of these proceedings 17 taxed to respondent. 18 Judgment accordingly. 3 1 2 MOYER, C.J., DOUGLAS, RESNICK, F.E. SWEENEY, PFEIFER, COOK and LUNDBERG STRATTON, JJ., concur. 3 4
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
