Interim administrator eases past suspension

Board concludes 'conduct had no dishonest or selfish motive'

Board concludes ‘conduct had no dishonest or selfish motive’ by attorney Rob Weber, who retained a law license.

Interim Lorain County Administrator Rob Weber was recommended for a one-year stayed suspension of his law license by the Ohio Supreme Court’s Board of Professional Conduct for mishandling payments from clients, according to court records.

Following a March 24 hearing before the court’s Board of Professional Conduct, the panel concluded with clear and convincing evidence that Weber engaged in professional misconduct involving five personal injury clients between 2016 and 2018 and a failure to comply with rules governing his interest on lawyers trust account (IOLTA).

Weber replaced Tom Williams, who was fired Aug. 18. No reason was given for Williams’ dismissal.

According to the American Bar Association, an interest on lawyers trust account is an account attorneys use to handle client money.

On June 11, the panel issued Weber a one-year stayed suspension and ordered him to undergo six hours of continuing legal education on interest on lawyers trust account and client fund management, refrain from further misconduct and pay the cost of the proceedings.

“(Weber) had not had any prior discipline and his conduct had no dishonest or selfish motive,” the Board of Professional Conduct concluded. “Although the evidence established that on several occasions the balance in (Weber’s) IOLTA fell below the amount of client’s money that had been retained from their settlement checks, there is no evidence that it was due to Respondent’s misappropriation of the funds for his own benefit.

“Rather, it clearly appears that he was simply not experienced in the management of client funds in an IOLTA prior to starting his own solo practice.”

Weber acknowledged the violations in the March 24 hearing.

According to documents, the complaint against Weber was filed Dec. 2, 2020; in March 2016, he established his own solo law practice.

In his prior work as an associate with other firms, he had no involvement in the management of interest on lawyers trust accounts.

In three separate cases, the complaint alleged Weber deposited med-pay checks endorsed with the client’s signatures without their knowledge.

On Aug. 22, 2016, Weber was retained by a woman in a personal injury claim and three checks in the amounts of $505, $3,020 and $455 were issued to her from an insurance company and deposited into Weber’s interest on lawyers trust account with her endorsement.

Board documents indicate the woman was unaware of the checks, did not sign them and did not authorize anyone to endorse her name on the back of the checks.

In a similar case, on Oct. 13, 2016, a woman retained Weber in a personal injury case and an insurance company issued two checks for $775 and $225, the client was unaware of the checks, did not sign them nor authorize anyone to endorse her name.

On March 23, 2017, Weber represented another woman and a check for $10,597 was issued and deposited into his interest on lawyers trust account without her knowledge or permission to endorse her name, the complaint said.

Weber was not immediately available for comment.

According to the American Bar Association, an interest on lawyers trust account is an account attorneys use to handle client money.