You are on page 1of 9

IN THE OFFICE OF DISCIPLINARY COUNSEL

THE SUPREME COURT OF OHIO

GRIEVANCE AGAINST SIMON LAWRENCE LEIS, JR.


(Rules V and VII of the Supreme Court Rules for the Government of the Bar of Ohio)

SUPPLEMENT TO GRIEVANCE FORM


To the Honorable Disciplinary Counsel:
Now comes Nathaniel Livingston, Jr., and hereby respectfully represents to this Office of
Disciplinary Counsel as follows:
I.

JURISDICTION
1.

ETHICAL MISCONDUCT Article IV, Section 2(B)(1)(g) of the Ohio

Constitution provides the Supreme Court of Ohio with original jurisdiction over admission to
the practice of law, the discipline of persons so admitted, and all other matters relating to the
practice of law. This jurisdiction includes authority over ethical misconduct by attorneys and
judges.
2.

UNAUTHORIZED PRACTICE OF LAW The Ohio Supreme Courts

jurisdiction includes authority over the unauthorized practice of law. Pursuant to this
constitutional authority, the Court promulgated Rule VII of the Supreme Court Rules for the
Government of the Bar of Ohio. Gov. Bar R. VII (Unauthorized Practice of Law) governs
unauthorized practice of law proceedings. It established the Board on the Unauthorized Practice
of Law of the Supreme Court of Ohio.
3.

VIOLATIONS OF CRIMINAL STATUTES The Ohio Supreme Court has

determined that where, in the course of an investigation by the Office of Disciplinary Counsel, it
is found that a person involved in the investigation may have violated federal or state criminal
statutes, the Office of Disciplinary Counsel shall notify the appropriate law enforcement agency,
prosecutorial authority, or regulatory agency of the alleged criminal violation and may provide
the agency or authority with information concerning the criminal violation.

II.

PARTIES
4.

The Office of Disciplinary Counsel is charged with investigating allegations of

ethical misconduct against attorneys and judges. The Office of Disciplinary Counsel investigates
allegations and initiates complaints concerning ethical misconduct of judges or attorneys under
the Code of Professional Responsibility, the Rules of Professional Conduct, the Code of Judicial
Conduct, and rules governing the Unauthorized Practice of Law, pursuant to the Ohio Supreme
Court Rules for the Government of the Bar and the Government of the Judiciary.
5.

The Board on the Unauthorized Practice of Law of the Supreme Court of Ohio is

charged with investigating complaints of unauthorized practice of law.


6.

Simon Lawrence Leis, Jr. is a white man.

7.

The Ohio Supreme Courts website states Leis was admitted to the practice of law

in the state of Ohio on May 11, 1966. His Ohio Supreme Court Registration Number is
0015356.
8.

From 1971-1983, Leis served as Hamilton County Prosecuting Attorney. From

1983-1987, he served as a judge of the Hamilton County Court of Common Pleas.


9.

In or around June 1987, Leis was appointed Sheriff of Hamilton County, Ohio.

He was elected Sheriff in November, 1988 and served in that position until his term ended on
December 31, 2012.
10.

In a letter dated May 1, 2012, Ohio Supreme Court Chief Justice Maureen

OConnor wrote to thank then-Sheriff Leis for advising her of his retirement. She notified him
that she informed the Courts Judicial and Court Services Division of his interest in serving as a
retired assigned judge (where he would rake in between $60.68 - $66.00 per hour and $485.44 $528.00 per diem). [A copy of the letter is attached as Exhibit A.]
11.

On October 22, 2012, Diane E. Hayes, Judicial Assignment Specialist with the

Court, wrote Leis: Pursuant to Chief Justice OConnors approval for you to serve as a retired
assigned judge indicating Leis was approved to practice law while serving as a retired
assigned judge. [See, Exhibit B.]
12.

The Ohio Supreme Courts website currently (March 19, 2015) contains the

Page 2 of 9

following additional information on Leis. His current registration is inactive. His Attorney
Title is: Sheriff. His Office is: Hamilton County. His Employer Address is: Justice Center Room
110, 1000 Sycamore Street, Cincinnati, OH 45202. His Office Phone is: 000.946.6400.
13.

Upon information and belief, Simon L. Leis, Jr. is an attorney at law, duly

admitted to the practice of law in the state of Ohio. He is serving as a retired assigned judge. As
an attorney and a judicial officer, Leis is subject to the Code of Professional Responsibility, the
Ohio Rules of Professional Conduct, and the Ohio Code of Judicial Conduct.
III. NON-PARTIES
14.

Nathaniel Livingston, Jr. is an individual citizen and African American man. At

all times mentioned in this Grievance he was an Ohio citizen. He is currently a resident of Lucas
County.
15.

Joseph Theodore Deters is a white man. Deters is, and at all times mentioned in

this Grievance was, an attorney at law, duly admitted to the practice of law in the state of Ohio.
From 1992-1999, Deters served as Hamilton County Prosecuting Attorney. In 1999, Deters
began serving as Treasurer for the State of Ohio.

Faced with multiple scandals, ethical

violations, criminal probes, and felony indictments, Deters fled the Treasurers Office in disgrace
and returned to the Prosecutors Office in 2004. He is the current prosecutor.
16.

Michael Kurt Allen is a white man. Allen is, and at all times mentioned in this

Grievance was, an attorney at law, duly admitted to the practice of law in the state of Ohio.
Allen served as Hamilton County Prosecuting Attorney from 1999 until he was busted having a
sexual relationship (that including sexual conduct in his public office) with one of his
subordinates. He was forced to resign in 2004.
17.

Francis David James Albanese is a white man. Albanese is, and at all times

mentioned in this Grievance was, an attorney at law, duly admitted to the practice of law in the
state of Ohio.
18.

Gail Antoinette Wright is a white woman. Wright is, and at all times mentioned

in this Grievance was, an attorney at law, duly admitted to the practice of law in the state of
Ohio.
19.

Robert Scott Croswell III is a white man.

Page 3 of 9

Croswell is, and at all times

mentioned in this Grievance was, an attorney at law, duly admitted to the practice of law in the
state of Ohio.
20.

Merlyn D. Shiverdecker is a white man. Shiverdecker is, and at all times

mentioned in this Grievance was, an attorney at law, duly admitted to the practice of law in the
state of Ohio.
21.

Beth Ann Myers is a white woman. Myers is, and at all times mentioned in this

Grievance was, an attorney at law, duly admitted to the practice of law in the state of Ohio.
22.

Ann Marie Tracey is a white woman. Tracey is, and at all times mentioned in

this Grievance was, an attorney at law, duly admitted to the practice of law in the state of Ohio.
23.

Ethna Marie Cooper is a white woman. Cooper is, and at all times mentioned in

this Grievance was, an attorney at law, duly admitted to the practice of law in the state of Ohio.
24.

Tracie Marie Hunter is an African American woman. In 2008, over 100,000

electors voted for Hunter to serve as a judge of the Hamilton County Juvenile Court. Chief
Justice OConnor, a white woman, has signed orders suspending Judge Hunter from practicing
law and disqualifying her from acting as a judge.
IV. LAW
25.

Ohio Revised Code 4705.01 explicitly prohibits a sheriff from practicing as an

attorney at law in any court of this state.


26.

Gov. Bar R. VII(2)(A) sets forth additional types of unauthorized practices of law.

27.

Ohio Revised Code 309.09(A) provides that the prosecuting attorney shall be

the legal advisor to all county offices and shall prosecute and defend all suits and actions
involving the county. The law specifically states: no county officer may employ any other
counsel or attorney at the expense of the county, except as provided in section 305.14 of the
Revised Code.
V. FACTS
28.

In 1974 (or possibly 1976), while serving as prosecutor, Leis authored a letter to

then-Hamilton County Sheriff Paul J. Fricker in which he opined that the sheriff may not employ
legal counsel or pay counsel from county funds.

Page 4 of 9

29.

On or about August 27, 1999, then-Sheriff Leis practiced law in the Hamilton

County Common Pleas Court. Leis signed his name to a complaint and caused that complaint to
be filed with the Hamilton County Clerk of Courts. The complaint listed Simon L. Leis, Jr.,
Sheriff as plaintiff. The two named defendants were: Democratic National Committee and
United States Secret Service. [A copy of the complaint is attached as Exhibit C.]
30.

Not only did Leis illegally engage in the unauthorized practice of law, this public

official also committed a Theft offense in violation of Ohio Revised Code 2921.41(A)(2), to
wit: THEFT OF UNITED STATES CURRENCY owned by the Hamilton County, Ohio, Board
of County Commissioners and/or the Hamilton County Sheriffs Office and/or the Hamilton
County Clerk of Courts and or the Hamilton County Common Pleas Court.
31.

Specifically, Leis, who was a public official, used his office to file the complaint.

He knew, or should have known, that he was statutorily prohibited from filing the lawsuit, and he
was therefore violating the law when he signed and filed the complaint. By filing the lawsuit,
Leis knowingly obtained, by deception, property from the county (money), which benefited
himself or another. He also knowingly caused, by his deception, some detriment to another,
namely the county. In the end, the lawsuit resulted in $91 in court costs, and an undetermined
amount in non-court costs (human and material resources, etc.).
32.

In addition to Leis unauthorized practice of law and theft by deception, he had

two members of his staff -- Gail Wright and Francis Albanese -- sign the complaint. Wright and
Albanese are listed as of counsel. Leis used county funds to pay them. Even if Leis had been
permitted to practice law, and spend county money on the lawsuit, he was not permitted to file
actions on behalf of his own office or on behalf of any other county office. Nor was he lgeally
entitled to authorize payment from the county for his lawsuit which violated the law. Also, Leis
wasnt lawfully authorized to employ others to do any of these things.
33.

After the lawsuit was filed, then-prosecutor Allen made statements to the media,

complaining about Leis improper filings. The filing sparked a public fight. Deters joined the
fight and made statements to the media on behalf of Allen, and against Leiss improper practice
of law and use of county funds.
34.

A September 1, 1999 story titled Leis, Allen feud a new fight but an old story,

published in The Cincinnati Post contained this: Allen believes the Leis suit is a violation of
Page 5 of 9

Ohio law and characterized it as sheer arrogance. The story continued: Allen said there is no
legal basis for the lawsuit. He said further that Leis has no right to file the suit and is in fact
breaking the law. Deters was quoted in that article, which means he knew what Leis had done.
[A copy of the newspaper article and several others are attached and marked Exhibit D.]
35.

News came on September 2, 1999 that Leis had filed at least 41 lawsuits. A

September 2, 1999 story in The Cincinnati Enquirer titled Sheriff filed dozens of lawsuits
contained these paragraphs:
Hamilton County Sheriff Simon L. Leis has signed his name to more than 40
lawsuits that prosecutors say violate Ohio law.
Court records show that the sheriff filed the suits during the past two years in an
effort to recover training fees and equipment costs from former employees.
.
According to court records, the sheriff has filed at least 41 lawsuits in Hamilton
Countys Small Claims Court and Municipal Court.
.
Former County Prosecutor Joseph Deters, who frequently feuded with the sheriff
before becoming state treasurer, said hes not surprised that Sheriff Leis filed suits
without consulting the prosecutor.
He said the sheriff often did not discuss issues with him and, at times, decided not
to follow the prosecutors legal advice.
Although more than a dozen of the suits were filed when he was prosecutor, Mr.
Deters said he never was notified by the sheriff.
While the sheriffs actions are not a crime, Mr. Allen said they could lead to
disciplinary action against him or the attorneys in his office.
A Supreme Court spokesman said the committee would evaluate any
complaint.
36.

To the best of my knowledge, no ethics or unauthorized practice of law complaint

was ever filed by Deters or Allen.


37.

Although a Supreme Court spokesman was made aware of Leis conduct, I am not

aware of any complaint or grievance being undertaken, or any investigation being conducted, to
determine if Leis violated any laws or rules.

Page 6 of 9

38.

To deal with the lawsuit filed by Leis, Allen filed a Motion of Hamilton County

Prosecuting Attorney for Leave to Intervene as Party Defendant and to Dismiss the Complaint.
In the motion, Allen argued (as he did in the newspaper) that Leis violated the law, even if the
violation wasnt a violation of any criminal statute.
39.

According to the Enquirer article cited above, more than a dozen of the suits were

filed when Deters was prosecutor. To the best of my knowledge, Deters never investigated Leis,
or convened a grand jury to consider indicting the white sheriff for filing lawsuits on behalf of
his office, or did anything to stop the sheriff from using county money to pay for lawsuits he
filed, or sought justice for Leis using county money to pay for his in-house counsel.
40.

Although their interactions with Leis were often hostile, I believe Deters and

Allen both demonstrated that the rule for dealing with white public officials is to have a fight,
work things out, but file no criminal charges.
41.

Deters hand picked Croswell and Shiverdecker to be appointed Special

Prosecutors. Their mission was always to bring indictments against Judge Hunter and force her
from the bench. Judge Beth Myers rubber-stamped Deters recommendation. Croswell is a
partner in the law firm Croswell & Adams Co., L.P.A. Gregory L. Adams is Croswells partner.
Croswell & Adams represents Deters in his personal divorce. Deters is Hamilton Countys legal
representative. He used his position to force the county to pay his personal divorce lawyers
firm a sum of money reported to be approximately one MILLION DOLLARS. (A series of
separate grievances/complaints are being prepared to have this conduct investigated and
addressed by Disciplinary Counsel.)
42.

I have read the Indictments against Judge Hunter and understand that at least two

counts relate to her allegedly authorizing county money to be used to pay for responsive filings
in lawsuits filed against her public office. Whereas the rule for Leis, a white man, was that
criminal charges would not be pursued against him because he didnt do anything criminal, the
rule for the Black woman, Judge Hunter is different.
43.

I have read the Motion to Dismiss Indictment filed by Judge Hunters criminal

defense attorney, Clyde Bennett II. In it, Bennett essentially accuses Deters of using Croswell
and Shiverdecker as his proxies.

They, in turn, have engaged in PROSECUTORIAL

VINDICTIVENESS and SELECTIVE PROSECUTION.


Page 7 of 9

44.

Unless I missed it, Bennett never mentioned Leis actions in his motion to

dismiss. He cited other examples to prove his point. The actions Hunter are alleged to have
taken are similar to those previously taken by Leis. Prosecutors are prohibited from selectively
prosecuting individuals based on race and/or gender. Nothing was done to Simon Leis when he
took actions, or caused actions to be taken, that seemingly violated the law -- engaging in the
unauthorized practice of law; illegally representing his county office; spending or causing county
money to be spent on the filing of at least 41 lawsuits (cumulative value most certainly in excess
of $1,000 within a ninety day period); hiring and paying others to represent his county office.
Leis faced no criminal investigation or grand jury witch hunt. When Judge Hunter allegedly
took far less serious actions, she got indicted and suspended from the bench. It looks like race
had something to do with the way Leis and Hunter were treated.
45.

The Office of Disciplinary Counsel has earned a reputation as an office that

refuses to launch and thoroughly investigate certain grievances. Disciplinary Counsel attempts
to claim it cant investigate grievances because they are related to unresolved criminal trials. In
this instance, Disciplinary Counsel should not try to use Judge Hunters pending criminal trial as
an excuse to ignore the matters complained of in this document because the grievance/complaint
is unrelated to Judge Hunters criminal case.

Disciplinary Counsel isnt being asked to

impermissibly intervene in Judge Hunters case. I have presented the racial element here so that
it can be preserved for future filings. It is professional misconduct for a lawyer (a prosecutor,
special prosecutor, or even judge) to engage, in a professional capacity, in conduct involving
discrimination prohibited by law because of race, color, religion, or gender.
46.

If Disciplinary Counsel investigates this grievance/complaint and determines Leis

violated federal or state criminal statutes, it would be improper to notify Hamilton County
officials since so many of them are, in some way, connected to the conspiracy to oust Judge
Hunter and protect white guys like Leis. In the event a determination is made that possible
criminal violations may have occurred, referral should be made to federal law enforcement
authorities or the Attorney General.

Page 8 of 9

Respectfully submitted,

_______________________________
NATHANIEL LIVINGSTON, JR.

Page 9 of 9

You might also like