Background
The Supreme Court of Florida entered an order on July 25, 2024, disbarring attorney James Dalton Saunders from practicing law in Florida.
Ohio disciplinary counsel filed a certified copy of the Florida order with the Supreme Court of Ohio under the reciprocal-discipline provisions of Gov.Bar R. V(20). The Ohio court ordered Saunders to show cause why it should not impose identical or comparable discipline, but no objections were filed.
The Court’s Holding
The Supreme Court of Ohio indefinitely suspended Saunders from practicing law in Ohio under Gov.Bar R. V(20)(C). Although Florida had disbarred him, Ohio imposed an indefinite suspension and barred his reinstatement in Ohio unless and until he is reinstated in Florida.
The court also required Saunders to satisfy Ohio’s reinstatement rules, comply with all applicable court rules and orders, submit evidence of his Florida reinstatement, and obtain an Ohio reinstatement order. During the suspension, he must cease practicing law, fulfill specified client-notification and file-and-property-return obligations, complete required continuing legal education, and reimburse qualifying awards made by the Lawyers’ Fund for Client Protection.
Key Takeaways
- An out-of-state disbarment supported reciprocal discipline in Ohio even though Ohio selected the comparable sanction of indefinite suspension.
- Saunders cannot be reinstated in Ohio before he is reinstated in Florida and satisfies Ohio’s independent reinstatement requirements.
- Because Saunders filed no objection to the proposed reciprocal discipline, the Ohio Supreme Court considered the matter on the certified Florida order.
Why It Matters
The order illustrates how Ohio responds when another jurisdiction disciplines an Ohio-licensed lawyer. Reciprocal discipline need not use the same label as the originating jurisdiction’s sanction, but it may impose a comparable restriction tied directly to the lawyer’s status there.
For multijurisdictional practitioners, the decision also underscores that discipline in one state can produce substantial consequences elsewhere, including practice restrictions, client-protection duties, continuing-education obligations, and separate reinstatement proceedings.