A veteran Toledo attorney has been publicly reprimanded for professional misconduct.
The Ohio Supreme Court, which governs the conduct of the state's attorneys, reprimanded Frank David Jacobs of Sylvania Township for representing both a husband and wife during their divorce. Mr. Jacobs, who was admitted to the Ohio bar in 1959, declined comment. Costs were assessed to Mr. Jacobs.
Mr. Jacobs was involved with a husband and wife who separated, and he continued to represent each legally while the divorce was pending. This was considered "misconduct - dual representation - accepting or continuing representation when professional judgment is likely to be compromised."
The findings of the panel of the Board of Commissioners on Grievances and Discipline of the Supreme Court were, in part:
After the Mihails' separation, Mr. Jacobs advised Dr. Mikhail on matters involving revisions to a revocable trust. The revisions removed Mrs. Mikhail as successor trustee and ensured that she would not have access to the principal of the trust on Dr. Mikhail's death.
Mr. Jacobs did not provide full disclosure to Mrs. Mikhail of his representation of her husband and did not attempt to obtain her consent for the dual representation.
The board stated there were no aggravating factors, but it did identify several mitigating factors, including the absence of any prior disciplinary record, the absence of any dishonest or selfishness on the part of Mr. Jacobs, his full disclosure and cooperative attitude during the disciplinary process, and the absence of any financial harm to Mrs. Mikhail.
The board also noted that Mr. Jacobs had submitted written statements from 16 judges, clients, and other attorneys about his good moral character and reputation. The justices voted 4-3 on May 24 in favor of the reprimand, with Justices Alice Robie Resnick, Paul Pfeifer, Evelyn Lundberg Stratton, and Judith Lanzinger voting in favor. Chief Justice Thomas Moyer and Justices Terrence O'Donnell and Maureen O'Connor dissented.
In his dissent, Chief Justice Moyer wrote he would have suspended Mr. Jacobs for six months and stayed the suspension on condition that he commit no further misconduct during that term.
First Published June 5, 2006, 1:23 p.m.
