43
Panel mulling how to punish Dann
CLEVELAND
Three members of a state disciplinary panel heard testimony regarding the possible law-license suspension of ex-Attorney General Marc Dann.
Whatever decision is made, it’s unlikely Dann, a lawyer in Ohio since 1987, would have to stop practicing.
Dann and the Ohio Supreme Court’s disciplinary counsel signed a tentative agreement Oct. 23 regarding the six-month stayed suspension.
But after Dann’s testimony at Thursday’s hearing, Joseph Caligiuri, senior assistant disciplinary counsel, sought a 12-month stayed suspension, stating the former attorney general tried to minimize what he did.
Alvin Mathews, Dann’s attorney, said his client “was remorseful and took responsibility for his actions. Whenever someone tries to explain what they did, it can be construed as not taking full responsibility. But he does take responsibility.”
Dann, a Democrat from Liberty, was found guilty in May 2010 by a Franklin County Municipal Court judge of two misdemeanor ethics violations for filing a false financial disclosure form and for providing improper compensation to state employees from his campaign and transition accounts.
Because of those convictions, he is subject to sanctions from the state Supreme Court.
Dann resigned as attorney general in May 2008, about 16 months into a four-year term, after a critical internal-office investigation determined he ran an unprofessional operation filled with cronyism. That led to multiple investigations and convictions for Dann, three of his former high-level staffers and his then-wife, who divorced him in July 2010.
Dann prefers a six-month stayed suspension, but he “could live with” a 12-month stayed suspension, Mathews said.
Twelve months “is a more significant sanction, but it’s not that big of a difference,” Mathews said, as long as Dann can still practice law during his suspension.
After a two-hour hearing in Cleveland, three members of the Supreme Court’s Board of Commissioners on Grievances and Discipline didn’t decide on a recommended punishment for Dann. They took the matter under advisement.
The three-person panel will prepare a written report and give it to the full 28-member Board of Commissioners on Grievances and Discipline, said Rick Dove, its secretary.
The board next meets Dec. 1 and 2, and then on Feb. 10, Dove said.
It isn’t known when the report would be given to the full board and when the full board would have a recommended punishment, he said.
The Ohio Supreme Court makes a final decision on the matter, Dove said.
“It could be a process that takes a few months,” Dove said.
The court could choose to accept, increase, decrease or dismiss the board’s recommendation or ask for another hearing, he said.
The Supreme Court gave Dann a public reprimand in March 2004 for filing the wrong pleading in a divorce case regarding spousal support in Mahoning County.