Van Wert lawyer accused of misappropriating funds (OH)
VAN WERT — Long-time Van Wert attorney C. Allen Runser is being charged with misconduct in a case filed last month by Disciplinary Counsel in the Board of Commissioners on Grievances and Discipline for the Ohio Supreme Court. Specific charges against Runser include failure to hold property of clients separate from the lawyer’s own property, not complying with reasonable requests for information from the client, not promptly delivering funds to a client or third party, not holding property of clients separate from the lawyer’s own property, engaging in conduct involving, fraud, deceit, or misrepresentation, and not acting with reasonable diligence and promptness in representing a client.
Runser has been practicing law since being admitted to the bar in 1967. That same year he established a practice. Shaun A. Putman was included as a partner in 2004.
Putman released this statement about the current situation: “I have a deep respect for the legal system, for the Plaintiffs, and for the Court, and as such I will not speak to any specifics of the pending lawsuit other than to say that I look forward to continuing to distance myself from the allegations at hand. I can assure you that my personal integrity and ethics were never, and will never, be compromised. I am excited to begin my own firm under the name of Putman Law Offices, LLC, and look forward to providing the same high standards of legal counsel as I have in the past. The current matter is certainly unfortunate, shocking, and disappointing, but it has also given me a new eagerness and determination that will only enhance my current practice.”
There are three counts in the Supreme Court complaint. The first deals with the guardianship of Jeanne Koch between 2005-2011. During this time Runser is accused of not filing proper and timely guardian’s reports or an inventory of Koch’s assets as required. The case outlines several past due notices sent to Runser from Van Wert County Probate Court, plus one notice of a final account which was to be filed within 30 days of the termination of the guardianship. Koch died June 13, 2011. That account was finally filed on Sept, 7, 2012.
Runser is also accused of not filing an inventory of Koch’s real and personal assets in a timely manner. As executor of Koch’s estate, he did not file the inventory by Nov. 9, 2011 as required and did not respond to an April 2, 2012 notice from Probate Court. After an extension was granted until Aug. 24, 2012, that deadline was missed also. The inventory was filed in November, more than 15 months after Koch was appointed as executor/administrator. The account of Koch’s estate,due Feb. 9, 2012 was not filed until January 2014.
Questions about the bank account for the estate were also raised in the case. The account was opened January 12, 2012. A check for nearly $112,000 was deposited at the end of May from the sale of Koch’s residential property in Van Wert, however instead of distributing the receipts of the sale according to the instructions in her will, Runser is accused of writing a series of checks to either himself or to his law firm totaling $80,965. Another deposit in September 2012 of over $28,000 from other possessions.
After making partial payment from the account to those entities named in the will and the payment of estate taxes and assorted debts, there was only $4,000 remaining in the account. A $4,000 check to the law firm reduced the balance to approximately $57. The account was overdrawn by a $900 check written to the law firm a few months later. Then after depositing more than $71,000 into the account from personal funds, the check writing resumed. After another infusion of funds from either a personal account or from another fund Runser was managing, estate distributions totaling over $100,000 were finally made over 18 months after the original account deposit was made.
The charge states, “Throughout the entire administration of the estate, at least two of the three beneficiaries of the estate had been attempting to reach [Runser] regarding the status of Koch’s estate. They had an extremely hard time reaching [Runser], and when they were able to speak [with him], he was unable/unwilling to provide them with any substantive information regarding the estate.”
The accusation of misusing the funds is bolstered by the following statement from the Supreme Court complaint: “When relator inquired into the funds that [Runser] has withdrawn from the Koch estate account, [Runser]attempted to minimize his conduct by stating that the funds were for attorney and executor fees for him and Putman. [Runser] neither requested, nor received, permission from the Van Wert County Probate Court to receive attorney or executor fees from the Koch estate.”
The second count deals with irregularities with as trustee of a trust fund for Barbara Mary Shackley. This charge contains many similar violations as charged in the first count. A trust beneficiary, Mary Ann Jensen, hired a law firm to get to the bottom of issues she was having with Runser. Over almost 19 months, Runser wrote check from the trust fund account to himself or his law firm totaling $471,350.
In a conversation with a representative of the law firm representing Jensen, Runser allegedly admitted that he had :inappropriately borrowed funds from the trust.” On another occasion, Runser wrote to Jensen’s attorney that he “had not done a good job in handling trust activity during the last several years,” and that he had not responded to requests for information from Jensen and that he had not completed annual trust accountings due to the “anticipated time involved in creating reports.”
The third count involves Runser’s Interest on Lawyer Trust Account (IOLTA), which was overdrawn several times in 2014.
The complain contends, “At a minimum, [Runser] used funds from his IOLTA to repay a personal and/or business line of credit. He also withdrew funds from his IOLTA on an ‘as needed’ basis, rather than ‘as earned,’ and he ran estate funds through his IOLTA rather than depositing them into a separate estate account. Furthermore, [Runser] misappropriated client funds from his IOLTA resulting in a shortage of at least $15,739.36.
The case against Runser is not on the schedule of the Board of Commissioners on Grievances and Discipline posted online. This body is the same one former judge Phil W. Campbell was brought before in 2010 on judicial misconduct charges.
Attribution:
Van Wert lawyer accused of misappropriating funds
Ed Gebert
October 16, 2014
Times Bulletin
http://www.timesbulletin.com/Content/News/News/Article/Van-Wert-lawyer-accused-of-misappropriating-funds/2/4/190919
Runser has been practicing law since being admitted to the bar in 1967. That same year he established a practice. Shaun A. Putman was included as a partner in 2004.
Putman released this statement about the current situation: “I have a deep respect for the legal system, for the Plaintiffs, and for the Court, and as such I will not speak to any specifics of the pending lawsuit other than to say that I look forward to continuing to distance myself from the allegations at hand. I can assure you that my personal integrity and ethics were never, and will never, be compromised. I am excited to begin my own firm under the name of Putman Law Offices, LLC, and look forward to providing the same high standards of legal counsel as I have in the past. The current matter is certainly unfortunate, shocking, and disappointing, but it has also given me a new eagerness and determination that will only enhance my current practice.”
There are three counts in the Supreme Court complaint. The first deals with the guardianship of Jeanne Koch between 2005-2011. During this time Runser is accused of not filing proper and timely guardian’s reports or an inventory of Koch’s assets as required. The case outlines several past due notices sent to Runser from Van Wert County Probate Court, plus one notice of a final account which was to be filed within 30 days of the termination of the guardianship. Koch died June 13, 2011. That account was finally filed on Sept, 7, 2012.
Runser is also accused of not filing an inventory of Koch’s real and personal assets in a timely manner. As executor of Koch’s estate, he did not file the inventory by Nov. 9, 2011 as required and did not respond to an April 2, 2012 notice from Probate Court. After an extension was granted until Aug. 24, 2012, that deadline was missed also. The inventory was filed in November, more than 15 months after Koch was appointed as executor/administrator. The account of Koch’s estate,due Feb. 9, 2012 was not filed until January 2014.
Questions about the bank account for the estate were also raised in the case. The account was opened January 12, 2012. A check for nearly $112,000 was deposited at the end of May from the sale of Koch’s residential property in Van Wert, however instead of distributing the receipts of the sale according to the instructions in her will, Runser is accused of writing a series of checks to either himself or to his law firm totaling $80,965. Another deposit in September 2012 of over $28,000 from other possessions.
After making partial payment from the account to those entities named in the will and the payment of estate taxes and assorted debts, there was only $4,000 remaining in the account. A $4,000 check to the law firm reduced the balance to approximately $57. The account was overdrawn by a $900 check written to the law firm a few months later. Then after depositing more than $71,000 into the account from personal funds, the check writing resumed. After another infusion of funds from either a personal account or from another fund Runser was managing, estate distributions totaling over $100,000 were finally made over 18 months after the original account deposit was made.
The charge states, “Throughout the entire administration of the estate, at least two of the three beneficiaries of the estate had been attempting to reach [Runser] regarding the status of Koch’s estate. They had an extremely hard time reaching [Runser], and when they were able to speak [with him], he was unable/unwilling to provide them with any substantive information regarding the estate.”
The accusation of misusing the funds is bolstered by the following statement from the Supreme Court complaint: “When relator inquired into the funds that [Runser] has withdrawn from the Koch estate account, [Runser]attempted to minimize his conduct by stating that the funds were for attorney and executor fees for him and Putman. [Runser] neither requested, nor received, permission from the Van Wert County Probate Court to receive attorney or executor fees from the Koch estate.”
The second count deals with irregularities with as trustee of a trust fund for Barbara Mary Shackley. This charge contains many similar violations as charged in the first count. A trust beneficiary, Mary Ann Jensen, hired a law firm to get to the bottom of issues she was having with Runser. Over almost 19 months, Runser wrote check from the trust fund account to himself or his law firm totaling $471,350.
In a conversation with a representative of the law firm representing Jensen, Runser allegedly admitted that he had :inappropriately borrowed funds from the trust.” On another occasion, Runser wrote to Jensen’s attorney that he “had not done a good job in handling trust activity during the last several years,” and that he had not responded to requests for information from Jensen and that he had not completed annual trust accountings due to the “anticipated time involved in creating reports.”
The third count involves Runser’s Interest on Lawyer Trust Account (IOLTA), which was overdrawn several times in 2014.
The complain contends, “At a minimum, [Runser] used funds from his IOLTA to repay a personal and/or business line of credit. He also withdrew funds from his IOLTA on an ‘as needed’ basis, rather than ‘as earned,’ and he ran estate funds through his IOLTA rather than depositing them into a separate estate account. Furthermore, [Runser] misappropriated client funds from his IOLTA resulting in a shortage of at least $15,739.36.
The case against Runser is not on the schedule of the Board of Commissioners on Grievances and Discipline posted online. This body is the same one former judge Phil W. Campbell was brought before in 2010 on judicial misconduct charges.
Attribution:
Van Wert lawyer accused of misappropriating funds
Ed Gebert
October 16, 2014
Times Bulletin
http://www.timesbulletin.com/Content/News/News/Article/Van-Wert-lawyer-accused-of-misappropriating-funds/2/4/190919
No comments:
Post a Comment
Thank you for commenting.
Your comment will be held for approval by the blog owner.