RELATOR'S EXHIBITS The Lorent Matter 23 The Hovanes …voicemail available), (330) 799-4311...

IN

THE SUPREME COURT OF OHIO

WARREN BO PRITCHARD

Respondent

MAHONING COUNTY BAR

ASSOCIATION

Relator

CASE NO.

RELATOR'S MOTION FOR INTERIM

REMEDIAL SUSPENSION PURSUANT

TO GOV.BAR R.V SECTION 5(a)

AND R. XIV, SECTION 4 (C) OF

RULES OF PRACTICE OF THE

SUPREME COURT OF OHIO

RELATOR'S MOTION FOR INTERIM REMEDIAL

SUSPENSION PURSUANT TO GOV.BAR R.V SECTION (5a) AND

R. XIV, SECTION 4(C) OF THE RULES OF PRACTICE OF THE SUPREME

COURT OF OHIO

David C. Comstock, Jr. (0040145) Warren Bo Pritchard

100 Federal Plaza East, St. 926 (0008417)Youngstown, Ohio 44503-1811 296 N. Canfield-Niles Rd.

Youngstown, Ohio 44515

Counsel of RecordAttorney for Relator 2104 South Meridian Road


Respondent

Ronald E. Slipski (0014404)120 Westchester Drive, Ste. A

P.O. Box 4338

Austintown, Ohio 44515

Attorney for Relator

Ae(.^4

1pRIs-IV'^E:Oa ffl, OF OHIO

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Introduction ................................................ 3

Notice to Respondent ........................................ 5

Memorandum in Support of Interim Remedial Suspension ........ 6

Introduction ........................................... 6

Grievances .............................................

The Bury Matter ................................... 6

The Cenneno Matter ................................ 8

The Columbiana Bar Association Matter ............. 11

The Corll Matter ................................... 26

The DiDomenico Matter ............................. 16

The DiRenzo Matter ................................ 13

The Hovanes Matter ................................ 24

The Lorent Matter ................................. 23

Proposed Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law ............ 30

Conclusion .................................................. 32

Certificate of Service ...................................... 34

Appendices

RELATOR'S EXHIBITS

A: Affidavit of Margaret Bury

B: Affidavit of Gerald Cenneno

C: Columbia County Common Pleas Case 2008 RE 99 Pleadings

D: Affidavit of William DiRenzo

E: Affidavit of Amy DiDomenico

F: Affidavit of Evelyn Sue Lorent

G: Affidavit of Carol Hovanes

H: Affidavit of Duane and Tracie Corll

-2-

IN

THE SUPREME COURT OF OHIO

In re:

WARREN BO PRITCHARD

Respondent

MAHONING COUNTY BAR

ASSOCIATION

Relator

CASE NO.

RELATOR'S MOTION FOR INTERIM

REMEDIAL SUSPENSION PURSUANT

TO GOV.BAR R.V, SECTION 5(a)

AND R. XIV, SECTION 4(C) OF THE

RULES OF PRACTICE OF THE

SUPREME COURT OF OHIO

INTRODUCTION

Relator, Mahoning County Bar Association, moves this court

pursuant to Gov. Bar R.V(5a) for an interim remedial suspension of

respondent, Warren Bo Pritchard, Attorney Registration Number

0008417.

Respondent has engaged and continues to engage in a course of

conduct that poses a substantial threat of serious harm to the

public and that is prejudicial to the administration of justice.

As is demonstrated below, respondent has engaged in conduct:

• that involves dishonesty, fraud, deceit, and

misrepresentation;

• that adversely reflects on his fitness to practice law;

• that is prejudicial to the administration of justice;

• that involves neglecting legal matters entrusted to him;

• that is/was prejudicing and/or damaging his clients

during the course of a professional relationship;

-3-

that involves entering into an agreement for, charging,

or collecting an illegal or clearly excessive fee, in

comparison with the amount of work performed;

that involves intentionally failing to seek the lawful

objective of his clients;

that involves intentionally failing to carry out a

contract of employment for professional services;

that involves entering a business transaction with a

client where there were differing interests; and

that involves failing to promptly pay or deliver to a

client the funds, securities and other properties in his

possession to which the client is entitled.

The referenced conduct, as is explained more fully in this

motion, demonstrates a simple pattern. Respondent acquires new

clients by making various promises, obtains advance legal fees for

services to be performed, and subsequently provides minimal or no

legal services. Respondent fails to respond to reasonable

inquiries by his clients, and as a result, his conduct has caused

financial hardship or other harm to his clients, and in some cases,

a loss of legal rights. His continued practice of law will likely

cause further financial harm to current and future clients and

potentially a loss of their ability to protect their legal rights

and/or properly fulfill their legal obligations.

Relator became aware of respondent's problems on April 21,

2009 when William DiRenzo filed a complaint with the Mahoning

County Bar Association alleging ethical violations. Subsequent to

-4-

this first grievant, relator began to receive additional complaints

from clients of respondent. Relator continues to receive a steady

stream of complaints from clients and/or former clients of

respondent. In support this motion, relator has obtained

affidavits signed by respondent's clients attesting to the truth

and accuracy of the allegations set forth by relator.

The facts set forth in this motion represent reported acts of

respondent's misconduct. Relator has reason to believe that

additional acts, not yet reported to it, have occurred and will

likely become known to the relator after the filing of this motion.

Relator believes that respondent's continued practice of law,

coupled with his ability to generate new clients, poses a

substantial risk of harm to the public, and, as a result,

respondent should be placed on interim remedial suspension. In

order to protect the interests of respondent's numerous clients, an

attorney should also be appointed under Gov. Bar R.V Section 8(f)

to oversee respondent's files.

NOTICE TO RESPONDENT

Pursuant to Gov. Bar R. V Section 5 (a) (A) (1) (a) , relator

attempted to contact respondent in advance of the filing of this

motion. On Wednesday, October 28, 2009, counsel for relator, David

C. Comstock, Jr., personally attempted to contact Warren Bo

Pritchard at (330) 518-3843 (cellular phone, no answer, no

-5-

voicemail available), (330) 799-4311 (previous office,

disconnected) and (330) 337-6405 (possible office, left message to

check mail) Relator hand-delivered a copy of this motion and its

exhibits to respondent at 296 N. Canfield-Niles Rd., Youngstown,

Ohio 44515 (office) ; 82 Ohltown Road Austintown, Ohio 44515

(Township office); and 2104 South Meridian Road, Youngstown, Ohio

(residence) . All copies were placed in sealed envelopes and marked

"Confidential". A letter advising of Relator's intent to file the

motion on October 29, 2009 was included.

MEMORANDUM IN SUPPORT OF INTERIM REMEDIAL SUSPENSION

This memorandum in support of relator's motion for an interim

remedial suspension arises out of multiple grievances filed with

the Mahoning County Bar Association. Relator has provided a

summary of these matters.

THE BURY MATTER

(Affidavit of Margaret Bury: Exhibit A)

On May 27, 2009, grievant Margaret Bury ("Bury") retained

respondent for the purpose of filing a bankruptcy petition on her

behalf.

On that date, Bury paid a partial payment of $300.00 to the

respondent. Thereafter, on June 20, 2009, she paid another

$500.00. to respondent. (See Exhibit A-1.) On July 1, 2009, Bury

paid $250.00 toward fees respondent required to file the bankruptcy

-6-

and for the fee required by the United States Bankruptcy Court

(which was $300.00). (See Exhibit A-2.) Bury's total payment to^

respondent was $1,050.00.

Respondent requested that Bury produce paperwork that would

permit him to file the bankruptcy on Bury's behalf. Bury produced

the requested paperwork, and respondent advised her that he would

file the bankruptcy petition within a week.

On July 18, 2009, Bury met with the respondent for a final

meeting to review her case prior to filing the bankruptcy petition.

Since that meeting, Bury has been calling respondent on numerous

occasions. Respondent has failed to return Bury's calls. Bury

claims that on several occasions, she left lengthy messages on

respondent's answering machine at his office. On other occasions,

the phone has rang "busy" for several hours at a time.

On August 17, 2009, Bury telephoned respondent and received a

recording that the telephone line had been disconnected.

On August 21, 2009, Bury again called respondent's phone and

received the answering machine. Bury left two messages. To date,

Bury has never received a telephone call.

To date, Bury's bankruptcy petition has never been filed, and

respondent has failed to refund any portion of the fees for legal

services paid by Bury.

THE CENNENO MATTER

(Affidavit of Gerald Cenneno: Exhibit B)

On April 17, 2008, grievant Gerald Cenneno ("Cenneno")

retained respondent for a breach of contract case against St. Anne

Ukranian Byzantine Catholic Church. Respondent agreed to represent

Cenneno for $1,200.00, and stated that he would file the complaint

against the church in the Austintown court system (Mahoning County

Court, Area No. 4). Cenneno paid respondent the required fee in

three separate payments.

The complaint was filed on July 1, 2008 by the respondent.

Service on the defendant was completed on July 7, 2008.

On August 8, 2008, the defendant filed its answer, and filed

a counterclaim and third party complaint naming Gerald Cenneno and

John Doe, partner in Howling Acres Kennels and Lawncare as

additional defendants.

Until this point, Cenneno had not heard from the respondent,

until the new pleadings were received on or about August 11, 2008.

Cenneno then met with the respondent who stated that he needed

to turn in some paperwork. Cenneno brought to the respondent the

requested papers, and respondent stated that he would file them

with the court.

Cenneno then never heard from respondent again. Cenneno has

called many times throughout 2008 and 2009. Many messages were

left with the respondent. No messages were returned.

Discovery was issued to the other parties by the defendant

church. Thereafter, a motion to compel discovery was filed on

behalf of the church on November 10, 2008.

On January 7, 2009, motions for default judgment and for

sanctions were filed against the other parties on behalf of the

defendant church.

On February 24, 2009, a request for a case status was

forwarded to the respondent.

On March 2, 2009, the court granted default judgment in favor

of defendant St. Anne Ukranian Byzantine Catholic Church and

against Howling Acres Kennels and Lawncare, Gerald Cenneno, and

John Doe Partner in Howling Acres Kennels and Lawncare.

On April 9, 2009, a certificate of judgment was issued to the

counsel for the church, which was filed with the Court of Common

Pleas on May 18, 2009. (See Exhibit B-1.)

On April 20, 2009, Cenneno received a letter from St. Anne's

attorney stating that they had lost the case by default. Cenneno

claims that they were never notified by either the court or

respondent of any hearing or requirement to appear.

As a result of the receipt of the letter on April 20, 2009,

Cenneno telephoned the respondent for approximately three weeks

straight until Cenneno was finally able to reach respondent. At

that time, respondent stated that he was never notified of any

court hearing, and that other clients had been placed in similar

circumstances by the court. Respondent stated he would talk to the

Magistrate because he had a meeting scheduled with her on Friday

and would call Cenneno back that day.

Respondent never contacted Cenneno, so Cenneno continued to

call respondent several times the following week. Messages were

left with the respondent's secretary. Respondent never returned

any of Cenneno's telephone calls.

Cenneno continued to telephone respondent until he again

reached him. At that time, respondent stated that the Magistrate

was on vacation and that the respondent would see her and take care

of it.

Cenneno continued to contact respondent many times, and

continued to leave messages requesting that Cenneno be informed as

to the status of the case.

After several months, Cenneno finally reached the respondent,

and was once again informed by respondent that he would have to see

the Magistrate. Respondent stated that he would call Cenneno on

Friday or by noon that Saturday. Respondent never returned

Cenneno's telephone call.

Finally, Cenneno telephoned the Austintown court at the end of

July, 2009. Cenneno was then informed by the court staff that no

pleadings had been filed on his behalf, and that he should speak to

his attorney.

As a result, Cenneno again attempted to telephone respondent,

and left several messages with respondent's daughter. Respondent

never returned these calls. Thereafter, Cenneno continued to

telephone respondent many times, and again did not receive a

response.

To date, respondent has not returned Cenneno's telephone

calls, has failed to refund any portion of the legal fees paid by

Cenneno, has failed to respond to the default judgment, or take any

other action to protect his clients.

THE COLUMBIANA COUNTY BAR ASSOCIATION/ESTATE OF

STEVE YANCSURAK MATTER

Respondent was appointed to be the commissioner and counsel

for the estate of Steve Yancsurak in the Court of Common Pleas,

Probate Division, of Columbiana County, Ohio. The release for

administration of the estate came before the court on May 14, 2009

pursuant to the court's orders of citation to show cause.

-11-

Appearing before that court was Donna Yancsurak, the applicant.

Respondent was also ordered to appear. Respondent failed to do so.

The court found that respondent has failed to appear for the

last two hearings and had been warned that his failure to appear

would result in a finding of contempt and appropriate sanctions

including a warrant for his arrest.

The court found respondent in contempt of the court's order

for his repeated failure to appear for hearings and to timely

complete the release from administrative form. A warrant was

issued for respondent's arrest. Upon apprehension, he was subject

to release upon posting a $2,500.00 recognizance bond with the

court; that he appear before the court as and when ordered for

further hearings; and that he advise the court at all times

regarding his current address and mailing address, as well as

current telephone number. A copy of the order was delivered to the

Columbiana County Certified Grievance Committee for further

consideration. (See copy of court's order of May 15, 2009 attached

as Exhibit C-1, and the court's bench warrant of May 15, 2009

attached as Exhibit C-2.)

The Columbiana County Certified Grievance Committee then

forwarded the court's order to relator for further handling.

THE DIRENZO MATTER

(Affidavit of William DiRenzo: Exhibit D)

Respondent served as the legal counsel for grievant William

DiRenzo ("DiRenzo") prior to February 10, 2006. During the period

that respondent served as DiRenzo's counsel, DiRenzo learned that

the respondent had property for sale on State Route 46 in

Austintown Township, Mahoning County, Ohio. Thereafter, respondent

reached an agreement with his client (DiRenzo) for the purchase of

one lot known as Permanent Parcel 480400158000. Thereafter, the

lot was sold and transferred to DiRenzo.

Subsequently, the respondent informed DiRenzo that he was

anticipating selling more land in the area of DiRenzo's lot (Parcel

480300158000). DiRenzo informed the respondent that he would in

fact be interested in purchasing adjoining lots when the respondent

was ready to sell them. Sometime thereafter, the respondent

informed DiRenzo that he purchased a two acre adjoining lot for the

sum of $29,500.00. For reasons unknown to DiRenzo, the respondent

stated that he needed a deposit of $28,000.00 that day, and asked

DiRenzo to make his check payable to "Michael B. Dockry". Dockry

is an attorney licensed to practice law in the State of Ohio, is

the current Austintown Township Administrator, and previously was

a partner of, or shared office space with, respondent.

-13-

DiRenzo then obtained an official check (No. 3687217) from Sky

Bank in the amount of $28,000.00 for the two acre lot, and

delivered the check to Michael Dockry on November 28, 2006 as

requested by respondent. (See Exhibit D-1.)

For several months thereafter, DiRenzo repeatedly telephoned

respondent regarding the property transfer in order to determine

when the sale would be finalized and DiRenzo would receive his

deed. DiRenzo was assured by respondent that the paperwork would

be completed soon.

On June 14, 2007, DiRenzo obtained from respondent a receipt

for the purchase of the two acres and was assured that the property

would soon transfer into his name. (See Exhibit D-2.) At that

time, DiRenzo was happy to have the matter moving forward and did

not thoroughly review the receipt. Instead, he relied on

respondent's representation that the receipt was documentation for

the purchase of the two acres of land that DiRenzo was buying from

the respondent. The receipt produced by respondent to DiRenzo,

indicates that DiRenzo paid respondent $29,500.00 for "payment on

a parcel of land approximately two acres from the 17 acre parcel on

Route-46 owned or formally owned by Bo Pritchard."

In June, when DiRenzo still had not received the deed for his

property, he continued to attempt contacting respondent. Later in

June, DiRenzo was finally able to contact respondent. Respondent

-14-

informed DiRenzo that DiRenzo needed to pay additional money for

the property so that the deed could be transferred.

Specifically, DiRenzo was instructed by respondent to obtain

a second cashier's check. DiRenzo did so on June 20, 2009. This

check, in the amount of $1,500.00, was payable to respondent and

was delivered to his office. This check was cashed by respondent

on June 20, 2007. (See Exhibit D-3.)

After this final payment was made by DiRenzo, DiRenzo did not

receive a deed, and had difficulty getting respondent to return his

telephone calls. While the real estate matters were ongoing,

respondent and DiRenzo were involved in legal proceedings

concerning the death of DiRenzo's spouse.

When DiRenzo did not receive a response from respondent, he

began looking at property that he was supposed to be purchasing

from his attorney. At that time, DiRenzo learned that the two

acres that he had allegedly purchased from respondent were actually

in the name of Carol and Ted Fye. DiRenzo learned that the

property had been bought by the Fyes at a Sheriff's Sale on

November 28, 2006, which coincidentally was the same day that

DiRenzo had delivered the $28,000.00 pursuant to respondent's

request. Mrs. Fye bought 17.12 acres (in three parcels) on Route 46

at the Sheriff's Sale adjacent to the parcel currently owned by

DiRenzo.

-15-

According to the information received from the Mahoning County

Sheriff's office and DiRenzo's bank, the $28,000.00 check that

DiRenzo had delivered to Dockry was negotiated by Mr. Dockry at

First Place Bank on November 28, 2006. First Place Bank then

issued a check (No. 3003382) in the amount of $29,500.00 payable to

the Sheriff's Department on November 28, 2006. That check showed

"46 Partners" as the remitter.

As stated previously, the Fyes purchased what DiRenzo had

thought were his two acres of land at a Sheriff's Sale on November

28, 2006. A deposit for the Fye sale was $44,500.00. $29,500.00

came from "46 Partners" and $15,000.00 came from Carol Fye.

At the time of the purchase, the Fyes believed that the

$29,500.00 delivered to them at the Sheriff's Sale was a partial

repayment of money that they had advanced respondent in September

of 2005. Apparently, the Fyes had advanced respondent $30,000.00.

To date, respondent has failed to provide either the deed of

sale to the property in question or has failed to return the money

to DiRenzo.

THE DIDOMENICO MATTER

(Affidavit of Amy DiDomenico: Exhibit E)

(Case No, 2007 CV F 1302)

On July 16, 2005, J & V Roofing and Home Improvement was

contracted to replace grievants Amy and Joseph DiDomenico

-16-

(^DiDomenicos") roof because of its age and condition. According

to the DiDomenicos, the roof replacement was substandard and

resulted in damages to their home. Thereafter, they retained

Attorney Anthony Donofrio to file a complaint against J & V for

breach of contract, breach of warranty, and violations of Ohio's

Consumer Sales Practices Act.

Thereafter, for reasons unrelated to this complaint, the

DiDomenicos became dissatisfied with their counsel and decided to

retain respondent to represent them in the pending lawsuit which

had been filed in the Mahoning County Court, Area No. 4. (Case No.

2007 CV F 1302.) Respondent agreed to represent the DiDomenicos on

September 15, 2007. At that time, the DiDomenicos paid respondent

a retainer fee of $850.00. A notice of appearance was filed in

the case on December 4, 2007. (See Exhibit E-1.) Respondent

failed to have the DiDomenicos sign a contingency fee agreement or

otherwise come to an agreement as to an hourly rate for his

services.

On January 27, 2008, the DiDomenicos paid respondent $250.00.

Additional fees, in the amount of $600.00, were paid on July 19,

2008. Allegedly, legal fees paid on July 19, 2008 were to cover

witness/subpoena fees. Additional court costs of $20.00 were paid

directly to Court No. 4 on June 30, 2009. (See Exhibits E-2 and E-

3.)

-17-

On February 20, 2008, the case was called for a pretrial.

Counsel for both the DiDomenicos and J & V were present. The court

ordered that discovery be completed in 90 days, and a dispositivei

motion deadline was scheduled for 120 days thereafter. The trial

to the bench was scheduled for five months. The court granted the

plaintiffs' oral motion to amend the complaint. The motion to

dismiss previously filed by the defendant and set for a non-oral

hearing was continued pending the filing of the amended complaint.

On May 7, 2008, the court held a pretrial, and scheduled the

civil trial for August 8, 2008.

On May 9, 2008, the DiDomenicos were to meet with thei

respondent at his office at 4:30 p.m. Respondent did not appear

for appointment at his office. The DiDomenico's sat at

respondent's office parking lot for 45 minutes before respondent

eventually called to cancel the appointment.

On July 23, 2008, the DiDomenicos again contacted respondent

and left a message. He did not return this call.

On August 6, 2008, respondent voluntarily dismissed the

DiDomenicos' case without prejudice, pursuant to Ohio Rule of Civil

Procedure 41(A). The court closed its case on August 11, 2008.

(See court docket, Exhibit E-1.)

On August 7, 2008, the DiDomenicos contacted respondent toi

confirm the time and date of trial. At that time, respondent%

-18-

informed the DiDomenicos that the original court date of August 8,

2009 was cancelled due to inaccuracies in the filing process.

On September 11, 2008, the DiDomenicos telephoned respondent

and his secretary said she would take a message and have respondent

return the call. Respondent never returned the call.


and left a message. Again, respondent did not return this call.

On September 23, 2008, the DiDomenicos again telephoned

respondent and left a message. Respondent did not immediately

return this call. However, when the DiDomenicos were finally able

to reach respondent by telephone, respondent stated that he was ill

and did not have a secretary. In a second telephone conversation,

respondent stated that he had a teenager at home who was ill and

that he didn't have a secretary anymore. At that point, respondent

also informed the DiDomenicos that a new trial could not be

scheduled until the spring of 2009 because of "important" trials

ahead of the DiDomenico's.

(Case No. 2007 CV F 1478)

On September 26, 2007, respondent filed a second complaint

against J& V Roofing in the Mahoning County Court, Area No. 4

(Case No. 2007 CVF 1478 on that court's docket). (See Exhibit E-4.)

On October 3, 2007, the court noted that the defendant had not

been served, and notified respondent accordingly.

-19-

On July 28, 2008, defendant's counsel filed a motion to

withdraw.

On September 5, 2008, the court forwarded a request for a case

status to respondent. Not having received a response, the court

dismissed the case for failure to appear and proceed, at

plaintiffs' cost.

On September 11, 2008, the DiDomenicos telephoned respondent's

office and spoke to his secretary. She stated that she would take

a message and have respondent return the call. Respondent never

returned this call.


and left a message. Again, respondent failed to return the call.

On March 6, 2009, the DiDomenicos stopped by respondent's

office to ask if any progress had been made in refiling the case.

An appointment was scheduled for March 7, 2009.

On March 7, 2009, the DiDomenicos appeared at respondent's

office for the scheduled appointment. At that time, they

questioned respondent regarding his failure to appear at the prior

hearing. Respondent stated that he was going through a divorce,

his wife had left him, and his files were intentionally

disorganized and/or tampered with. Respondent advised that he

would refile the complaint.

On March 13, 2009, the DiDomenicos telephoned respondent. At

that time, they left a message on his answering machine, but did

not receive a response.

On March 14, 2009, the DiDomenicos telephoned respondent. At

that time, they left a message on his answering machine, but did

not receive a response.

On March 17, 2009, the DiDomenicos contacted respondent's

office. At that time, they spoke to respondent's son who advised

that he was acting as respondent's secretary.

On March 19, 2009, respondent telephoned the DiDomenicos to

advise that the Magistrate was only in on Fridays. The respondent

advised that the matter would proceed in front of the Magistrate,

and he would make a decision whether to reinstate the case or

whether the DiDomenicos would have to refile.

On March 19, 2009, respondent filed a motion to vacate the

court's judgment entry of dismissal of October 27, 2008.

On March 23, 2009, the court gave notice to the parties that

a hearing on the motion would be scheduled for April 24, 2009 at

noon.

On April 16, 2009, the DiDomenicos telephoned the respondent

to determine if he had sufficient paperwork to support their case.

Respondent returned the phone call and stated that the hearing was

non-oral and that the DiDomenicos need not appear.

-21-

In the judgment entry of April 27, 2009, the court noted that

the case had been called for a non-oral hearing on the plaintiffs'

motion to vacate the order of dismissal dated October 27, 2008.

The court noted, however, that no attorney for the defendant had

been served with plaintiffs' motion, and therefore continued the

hearing for 30 days.

On April 30, 2009, respondent was requested to bring $20.00

to the court in order to permit service to proceed.

On June 24, 2009, the DiDomenicos telephoned the Court

Administrator, and at that time learned that the respondent had not

paid the fee to perfect certified mail service. At that time, the

DiDomenicos called and spoke to the respondent's son who advised

that respondent was out of town and that he would give him the

message.

On June 29, 2009, the DiDomenicos went to the court and paid

the $20.00 court fee directly. Thereafter, the DiDomenicos called

the respondent several times and received a busy signal at

respondent's office. They were not able to leave a message on an

answering machine.

On June 30, 2009, the court scheduled a hearing on the motion

for August 14, 2009 at 9:15 a.m.

Successful service on the defendant was made on July 14, 2009.

On July 20, 2009, Attorney James Wise filed his notice of

substitution of counsel with the court on behalf of the defendants.

On July 29, 2009, the DiDomenicos forwarded a certified letter

to the respondent reminding him of the pending trial. The letter

was returned to sender unclaimed.

Respondent did not appear for the court's scheduled hearing on

August 14, 2009. The Magistrate Judge recommended that the

DiDomenicos call during court to remind respondent of the trial.

The DiDomenicos telephoned and reminded the respondent that they

had forwarded to him a certified letter and received no response.

The court treated the August 14, hearing as a pretrial, and

noted that discovery was to be completed in 60 days, and that

dispositive motions were to be filed in 90 days. The court

scheduled a trial to the bench in 120 days.

On August 20, 2009, the court rescheduled the hearing for

December 11, 2009.

THE LORENT MATTER

(Affidavit of Evelyn Sue Lorent: Exhibit F)

On April 3, 2009, grievant Evelyn Sue Lorent retained

respondent to provide legal advice to her regarding the filing of

a possible bankruptcy and in relation to a probate matter. Lorent

paid to respondent the total sum of $1,300.00, in three separate

-23-

payments. (See Exhibits F-1, F-2, and F-3.) Lorent also provided

documents to respondent necessary for him to review the issues

presented by the grievant.

Thereafter, Lorent attempted to contact the respondent on

numerous occasions. She was unable to do so. Lorent also

forwarded a certified letter to respondent's home without receiving

a response.

On September 21, 2009, Lorent filed a grievance with the

Mahoning County Bar Association having not heard from her attorney

in more than five months. As of that date, respondent had failed

to provide any form of legal assistance to Lorent. Respondent has

also failed to return Lorent's files to her despite her repeated

requests to do so.

Respondent has failed to refund Lorent's payment for legal

services to be rendered by respondent.

THE HOVANES MATTER

(Affidavit of Carol Hovanes: Exhibit G)

On July 21, 2008, Bank of New York filed a complaint in

foreclosure against grievant Carol Hovanes ("Hovanes").

The complaint was served upon Hovanes on or about August 11,

2008.

Thereafter, Hovanes consulted with the respondent, a long-time

acquaintance, for legal advice relating to the foreclosure action.

-24-

In addition to stating that he would protect Hovanes'

interests in the foreclosure matter, respondent also recommended to

Hovanes that she file bankruptcy.

To represent Hovanes in both the foreclosure and bankruptcy

matters, respondent charged Hovanes the sum of $1,300.00, which she

paid to him.

After receiving the funds, respondent filed a motion for leave

to move or plead on behalf of Hovanes on or about September 8,

2008. This motion was granted by the Court on September 23, 2008.

No other document has been filed by the respondent in the

foreclosure case.

Thereafter, Hovanes continued to receive bills in the mail,

collection letters, and telephone calls from both collection

agencies and attorneys seeking payment on her debts.

As a result of these inquiries, Hovanes contacted the

respondent regarding the status of her bankruptcy.

Respondent advised Hovanes that he had forgotten to file her

bankruptcy. Nonetheless, respondent also advised Hovanes that

before she could declare bankruptcy, she would need to take a debt

counseling course. This was the first time that Hovanes had

received this instruction.

Hovanes then enrolled in a consumer credit counseling course.

Upon completion, she again attempted to contact respondent

-25-

regarding the status of her bankruptcy, as well as foreclosure

case.

Hovanes made numerous and repeated telephone calls to

respondent. For a period of time, Hovanes attempted to contact

respondent every day. No telephone call was ever returned by the

respondent.

Hovanes also forwarded a letter to respondent requesting a

status report regarding her case. Respondent did not reply to this

letter either.

To date, respondent has failed to keep Hovanes informed

regarding the status of her foreclosure case, has not filed a

bankruptcy petition, and has failed to respond to any collection

inquiry by attorneys or debt collectors. Respondent has failed to

return to Hovanes the original $1,300.00 fee, or any part thereof.

Hovanes has now secured new counsel to represent her in

connection with her pending foreclosure case and intended

bankruptcy petition.

The next scheduled hearing in the foreclosure matter is

January 7, 2010.

THE CORLL MATTER

(Affidavits of Duane and Tracie Corll: Exhibit I)

In July of 2008, grievants Duane and Tracie Corll ("Corlls")

initially met with respondent. The purpose of the meeting was to

-26-

discuss the Corlls' financial status, and the potential filing of

a bankruptcy petition on their behalf.

Respondent informed the Corlls that he would charge them a fee

of $1,300.00 for the bankruptcy case. The Corlls made an initial

installment at their first meeting, and by the end of August 2008,

had paid respondent in full.

During that period, the Corlls began filling out information

which was required for the bankruptcy petition. The Corlls also

took their credit counseling course which was required prior to the

filing of bankruptcy. Both the documents and course work were

completed before December of 2008.

As stated previously, the Corlis obtained the information

originally requested by respondent. All of the information, and

related documentation, was turned in to respondent. By December of

2008, respondent had lost the documents which the Corlls had

provided to him, and requested that the Corlls again fill out the

information.

As time progressed, the Corlls had a more difficult time

reaching respondent. When they were finally able to contact him

again, respondent informed the Corlls that they needed to put the

bankruptcy off until after they had filed their income taxes.

At respondent's suggestion, the Corlls waited to file their

bankruptcy. As time progressed, it became more and more difficult

to reach respondent by telephone or by stopping at his office.

Eventually, the Corlls were able to locate respondent in his

office in May 19, 2009. At that time, Mrs. Corl1 pushed the

subject of the filing of the bankruptcy petition. At that time,

respondent stated that he did not understand why it was a problem

because the Corlls were not paying any of their bills.

Following that conversation and the specific instructions by

Mrs. Corll that she wanted her bankruptcy completed, respondent

filed the petition that same day (May 19, 2009), almost six months

after the Corlls had first approached respondent.

The first hearing was scheduled on July 14, 2009.

The day before the bankruptcy hearing, respondent informed the

Corlls that they needed to provide their tax information at the

time of the hearing. Because the Corlls were unable to obtain the

requested material quickly (due to the late notice), the hearing

was rescheduled.

A second hearing was scheduled on July 28, 2009. Respondent

never appeared for this hearing. The hearing was again

rescheduled.

The third hearing was scheduled on August 11, 2009. The

hearing proceeded as scheduled. Following the hearing, the Corlls

completed their post-bankruptcy court class.

However, at that time they were not able to contact respondent

by either phone or by stopping at his office. The Corlls also

attempted to locate respondent at the Austintown Township Trustee

office, because he is a Township Trustee.

Another hearing was scheduled in the bankruptcy court on

September 24, 2009. This hearing was rescheduled because the

Corlls were not able to produce the requested documents. The

Corlls spent a week, prior to the hearing, attempting to locate

respondent to speak to him about the new court hearing.

When respondent was eventually contacted, he informed the

Corlls that they did not need to worry about the hearing, and that

they did not need to attend - that he would take care of the

hearing.

From September 24, 2009 to the present, the Corlls attempted

to contact respondent on numerous occasions. Despite numerous

calls, between September 24, 2009to the present, there has been no

contact between the respondent and the Corlls.

On October 3, 2009, the Corlls received a letter from the

United States Bankruptcy Court indicating that there case had been

closed without discharge because the Corlls did not timely file a

statement certifying completion of an instructional course.

In the same letter, the notice listed companies that the

Corlls had not provide sufficient contact information for as part

of the bankruptcy filing. However, this information had originally

been provided to respondent. This information was apparently lost

by respondent. In fact, the companies for which respondent had no

information are those that were provided to him twice by the

Corlls.

Additionally, because respondent took so long to file their

bankruptcy case, the Corlls had to retake the credit counseling

course in April of 2009. Respondent did pay for this course,

however.

As of today's date, the Corlls bankruptcy petition has not

been refiled. The Corlls are seeking new legal counsel to

represent them in their bankruptcy case.

PROPOSED FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW

Pursuant to Gov. Bar R.v (5a)(A)(1)(b), relator proposes the

following findings of fact and conclusions of law:

1. Respondent Warren Bo Pritchard, is currently licensed to

practice law in the State of Ohio and is subject to the

Code of Professional Responsibility.

2. Relator is currently investigating numerous allegations

of respondent's misconduct.

3. Relator has provided substantial credible evidence that

respondent has violated the following disciplinary rules

of the Ohio Rules of Professional Conduct:

a. Rule 1.1 [A lawyer shall provide competent

representation to a client.]

b. Rule 1.3 [A lawyer shall act with reasonable

diligence and promptness in representing a

client.]

c. Rule 1.4 ["A lawyer shall:

3. Keep the client reasonably informed about

the status of the matter;

4. Comply as soon as practicable with

reasonable requests for information from

the client.]

d. Rule 1.5 [A lawyer shall not make an agreement

for, charge, or collect and illegal or clearly

excessive fee.]

e. Rule 8.4 [It is Professional misconduct for alawyer to do any of the following:

***

"(b) Commit an illegal act that reflects

adversely on the lawyer's honesty or

trustworthiness.

"(c) Engage in conduct involving

dishonesty, fraud, deceit, or

misrepresentation;

(d) Engage in conduct that is prejudicial

to the administration of justice; and

-31-

(h) engage in any other conduct that

adversely reflects in the lawyer's

fitness to practice law.]

***

4. Relator has provided substantial, credible evidence that

respondent repeatedly engaged in and continues to engage

in conduct establishing that he poses a substantial risk

of harm to his clients and to the public.

5. Respondent should be immediately suspended from the

practice of law under Gov. Bar R.V Section 5a.

6. An attorney should be appointed under Gov. Bar R.V

Section 8(F).

CONCLUSION

Relator has presented substantial, credible evidence of

respondent's numerous violations of the Code of Professional

Responsibility. Respondent's propensity to prey upon his clients

poses a substantial threat of serious harm to the public and

warrants this court's immediate action. Accordingly, this court

should place respondent on interim suspension under Gov. Bar R.V,

Section 5(a).

Respectfully submitted,

MAHONING COUNTY BAR ASSOCIATION

By:

W(

DAVID C. COMSTOCK „t7R. (0040145)Bar Counsel

100 Federal Plazfa East, Suite 926

Youngstown, Ohib 44503

(330) 746-5643

RONALD E. SLIPSKI (0014404)

Bar Counsel

P.O. Box 4338


(330) 797-0086

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

Pursuant to Gov. Bar R. V, Section 5, I certify that a copy of

the foregoing motion has been hand delivered on the 28th day

of October, 2009, to: Warren Bo Pritchard at 296 N. Canfield-

Niles Road, Youngstown, Ohio 44515; 2104 South Meridian Road

Youngstown, Ohio 44511; 82 Ohltown Road, Austintown, Ohio

44515; and mailed via regular U.S. Mail to Respondent at his

home address.

MAHONING COUNTY BAR ASSOCIATION

By

DAVID C. COMSTOCK,/JR. (0040145)

100 Federal PI/aza East, Suite 926


(330) 746-5643

RONALD E. SLIPSKI (001440

Bar Counsel

P.O. Box 4338


(330) 797-0086

'STATE OF OHIO ) AFFIDA'VIT OF

) SS: MARGARET BURY

COUNTY OF' MAHOIQING

Now comes Margaret Bury, who first_ being duly sworn, affirmed

and cautioned according to law deposes and says that:

1. On May 27, 2009, I retai-ned Attorney Warren Bo Pritchard

("Attorney Pritchard") for the purpose of filing a

barilsruptcy petition on my behaif.

2. On thaL date, T paid a partial payment of $300.00 t.o

Attorney Pritchard. Thereafter, on June 20, 2009, T paid

another $500.00 to Attorney Pritchard. (See Exhibit A-1.)

On July 1, 2009, I paid $250.00 toward fees Attorney

Pritchard required to file the bankruptcy and for the fee

required by the United States Bankruptcy Court (which was

$300.00). (See Exhibit A-2.) My total payment.t.o Attorney

Pritchard was $1,050.00.

3. Attorney Pritchard requested that I produce paperwork

that would permit hi.m to file the bankruptcy on my

behalf. T produced the requested paperwork, and Attorney

Pritchard advised me that he would file the bankruptcy

petition within a week.

4. On July 18, 2009, I met w:iLh At..torney Pritc'riard for a

final meeting to review my case prior to fiiing the

bankruptcy petit:ion. Since that meeting, I have been

calling Attorney Pritchard on numerous occasions.

Attorney Pritchard has failed to return my calls. On

several occasions, I 1ef.t lengthy messages on Attorney

P-ritchard's answering machine at his office. On other

occasions, the phone has rang "busy" for several hours at

a time.

5. On August 17, 2009, I telephoned Attorney Pritchard and

received a r_ecordirg that the telephone line had been

disconnected.

6. On August 21, 2009, I again called Attorney Pritchard's

phone and received the answering machi-ne. S left t.wo

messages. To date, I have never received a telephone

call.

7. To date, my bankruptcy petition has not been filed, and

Attorney Pritchard has failed to refund any portion of

the fees paid to him for legal services.

Affiant has personal knowledge of all facts related i_n this

Affidavit and is confident. to testify.

FURTHER AFFIANT SAYETH NAUGHT.

SWORN to before ine and SUBSCRIBED in my presence this

1_.day of October, 2009.

NOTARY PUB

Notary Pu^ E- State ol OniaMy Commisiqdhas no exoiratlon dale.

Sectian 147,03 R.C,

WWI146CEIVEUFCiOM-.

QFOR FlENIQFpl9_

>CASriC)MONEV

ORDFR

(J GHrcl i : . .

^ CPLOIT ^"gy_-^......,J -. C.ARFI ^.. b

^rtrLLIV13DFIl7M ^C^f ( !` ^r^^^^ ^ Lf/ /

jfOFOFi RENrCi rOti _ _ _ ..--._

AC C C1UWT

IIF-WfrYA-0Lh.i+C ^'I

BAL D.JE

C..J [iniNCFi F[IOM -)

( ) cl ICl K :

! -'1 CFICDIT ,1,,. RY

STATE OF OHIO ) AFFIDAVIT OF

) SS: GERALD CENNENO

COUNTY OF MAHONING

Now comes Gerald Cenneno, wtio first being duly sworn, affirmed

arid cautioned according to law deposes and says that:

1. On April 17, 2008, I retained Attorney Warren Bo

Pritchard ("Attorney Pritchard) for a breach of conLract

case against St. Arine Ukranian Byzantine C.atholic Church.

Attorney Pritchard agreed to represerit me for $1,200.00,

and stated that he would file the complaint against the

church in the AustinLown court system (Mahoni_ng County

Court, Area No. 4) . I paid Attorirey PriLchard the

requi.red fee in three separate payments.

2. The cornplaint was filed on July 1, 2008 by ALtorney

Pritchard. Service on the defendarit was completed on July

7, 2008.

3. On August 8, 2008, the defendant filed its answer, and

filed a counterclaim and third party complaint naming me

and John Doe, partner in Howling Acres Kennels and

Lawncare as additional deferrdant.s.

4. Unt,i1 this poinL, I had not heard from Attorney

Pritchard, until the new pleadings were received on or

about August 11, 2008. I then met wiLh Attorney

Pritchard who staLed that he needed to turn in soine

paperwork to the court. I brought to Attorney Pritchard

the requested papers, and Attorney Pritchard stated that

he would file them with the court.

5. I then never heard from Attorney Pritchard again. I

called Attorney Pritchard many times throughout 2008 and

2009. Many messages were left with Attorney Pritchard.

No messages were returned.

6. Discovery was issued by the church. Thereaiter, a motion

to compel discovery was filed on behalf of the church on

November 10, 2008.

7. On January 7, 2009, motions for default judgment and for

sanctions were filed against the other parties on behalf

of the deferidanL church.

8. Ori February 24, 2009, a reguesL for a case status was

forwarded to Attorney Pritchard.

9. Ori March 2, 2009, the court granted default judgment i_n

favor of defendan'L SL. Anne Ukranian Byzantine C.atholic

Church and against Howling Acres Kennels and Lawncare,

John Doe Partner ir Howling Acres Kennels and Lawncare,

and me.

10. On April 9, 2009, a certificate of judgment was issued to

the counsel for Lhe church, which was filed with Lhe

Court of Common Pleas on May 18, 2009.

11. On April 20, 2009, 1 received a letter from St. Anne's

attorriey stating that I had lost the case by default. I

advised that 1 was never notified by either the court or

ALLorney Pritchard of ariy hearing or requirernent to

appear.

12. As a result of the receipt of the letter on April 20,

2009, I telephoried Attorney Pritchard for approximately

three weeks straight until I was finally able to reach

Attorney Pritchard. AL that time, Attorney Pri_tchard

stated that he was never notified of any court hearing,

and thaL other cli.ents had beeri placed in similar

circumstances by the court. Attorney Pritchard stated he

would talk to the Magistrate because he had a meeting

scheduled with her on Friday and would call me back that

day.

13. Attorney Pritchard never contacted me, so I continued to

call Attorney Pritchard several times•the fol.]owing week.

Messages were left with Attorney Pritchard's secretary.

Attorney Pritchard never returned any of my telephone

calls.

14. 1 continued to Lelephone Attorney Pritchard uriLil I again

reactZed him. At that time, Attorney Pritchard stated

that the Magistrate was on vacation arid that Attorney

Pritchard would see her and take care of it.

15. I continued to contact Attorney Pritehard many times, and

continued to leave messages requesting that I be informed

as to the staLus of the case.

16. After several months, I firially reached Attorney

Pritchard, and was once again informed by Attorney

Pritchard that he would have to see the Magistrate.

Attorney Pritchard stated that he would call. me on Friday

or by rroon that Saturday. Attorney PriLchard never

returned my telephone call.

17. Finally, I telephoned the Austintown court at the end of

July, 2009. :1 was then informed by the court staff that

no pleadings had been filed on my behalf, and that I

should spealc to my attorney.

18. As a result, I again attempt.ed to telephone Attorney

Pritchard, and left several messages with Attorney

Pritchard's daughter. Attorney Pritchard never returned

these calls. Thereafter, I conLinued to telephorie

Attorney Pritchar_d many times, and agairi did not receive

a response.

19. To date, Attorney Pritchard has not returned my Lelephone

calls, has failed to refund any portion of the legal fees

paid by me, has failed to respond to the default

judgment, or take any other action to proLect me.

Affiant has personal knowledge of. all facts related in this

Affidavit and is confident to testify.


Gerald Cenneno

SWORN to before me and SUBSCRIBED in my presence this

day of October, 2009.

^

trt^/VTARY PUBLIC

^(^

J Aar+ N. ? n?r^,^:;, idatary PublicState of.Ohio

i;Ay Oarrr,; Oon ExY

Public Access - Case Sumrnary

General Inquiry

IIfII

SuG7amxry ^ P,^r^^cs .^^ .^ ^ ,+:ni."• ^ Us^r,l.cis

Page 1 of I

New

tr1c 7 ,?14z, t^lspDslfion

Civil - Austintown - Summary50 2008 CV F 01182 ALJS HOWLING ACRES KENNELS AND LAWN CARE ST. ANNE IBYZANTINE CATHOLIC C:IIURCH et a]

PLAINTIFF(s) DEFENDANT(s)

NOWLING ACRES KENNELS AND LAWN ST. ANNE UKRANIAN BYZANTINECARE CATHOLIC CHURCII

Attorney(s) Attortiey(s)

Rnll Naine PRITCHARD, WARREN BO Fiil1 Name ARBIE, PHILLIP S.

Address 296 N CANFIELD NILES ROAD Address 409 HARMON AVE NW

SUITE D LOWER LEVEl

City/state/Zip YOUNGSTOWN OH 44515 CitylBtatelZip WARREN OH 4

Phone (330)799-4311 Phone (330)399-5518

CVF A CONTRACT

Additional Fiel

Case Atiributes

Number 50 2008 CV F 01182 AUS

Statns CLOSED

Filed 07/01/2008

Incomplete Fi

http://courts.mahoningcowit}roh.gov/pa/pa.urd/pamNa72000.o_case sum?'1949981 10/15/2009

Ptiblic Access - Docket List

General Inquiry

Page 1 of 4

Now Sc

r imm^ry t Phrli-: .^ : r^.n15--_.._ . . ^._. . _.__ -.. ..^Doaket's Nntx;s ^ Da p>oaflu•l 'I ^

Docket Search

50 2008 CV F 0] 182 AUS FIOWLINU ACRES KENNELS AND LAWN CARE ST. ANNEUICRANIAN BYZANTINE CATPIOLIC CHIJRCH et al

Search Criteria

Docket D'ese. ALL

Begin Date

End Date

Sort

^ ^ Asceuding

(9) Descending

Search Results 20 Docket(s) found matching seai-ch criteria.

Docket Docket Text Amount Atnount ImagesDate Due

05/20/2009CERTIFICATE OF JLJDGMENT 0.00 0.00RETUP.NED FILED ON 18TH DAY OFMAY, 2009. JIJDGMENT DOCKET 208PAGE 185, CASE NUMBER 09 JL208185 IN TRUMBULL CLERK OFCOURTS.SH

04/09/2009 CERT OF J UDGMENT ISSUED TO 5.00 0.00Attorney: ARBIE, PFIILLIP S. (31745) - 2FOR EACI-I DEFT. B.Ff Receipt: 120785Date: 04/1 4120 0 9

04/09/2009 CERT' OF JUDGMENT ISSUED TO 5.00 0.00Attorney: ARBIE, PHILLIP S. (11745).BJT Receipt: 120785 Date: 04/14/2009

04/09/2009 CER'1' OF .fUDGMENT ISSUED TO 5.00 0.00Attorney: ARBIE, PHILLIP S. (31745).BJT Receipt: 120785 Date: 04/14/2009

04/09/2009 CERT OF JUDGMENT ISSUED TO 5.00 0.00Attorney: ARJ3IE, PHILLIP S. (31745).

(ittp://courts.mahoningcount)roh.gov/pa/pa.urd/paznea2000.docket_ 1st?1949981 10/15/2009

Public Access - Docket List Page 2 of 4

BJT Receipt: 120785 Date: 04/14/2009

03/02/2009 UPON MOTION AND GOOD 0.00 0.00GROUNDS SHOWN, DEFAULT.TUDGIvIEN'I' IS HERLBY AWARDEDIN FAVOR OF DEFENDANT' ST ANNEUI4RANIAN BYZANTINE CATHOLICCHIJRCH AND AGAINST HOWLINGACRES KENNELS AND LAWN CARE,GERALD CENNENO, AND JOI-IN DOBPARTNER IN HOWLING ACRESKENNELS AND LAWN CARF,. /S/DAD.SII

02/24/2009 RF_,Q[JEST FOR CASE STATUS SENT 0.00 0.00'I'O ATTORNEY AND/OR PLAINTIFF.BJT

01/07/2009 MOTION FOR DEFAULT JUDGMENT 0.00 0.00FILED BY Attotney: ARBIE, PHILLIP S.(31745) & MOTION FOR SANCTIONS,(NO ORDERS FOR THE JUDGE TOSIGN, MOTION PLACED INCASE)./LK

11/10/2008 MOTION TO COMPEL DISCOVERY 0.00 0.00FILED BY Attoi-ney: ARBIE, PHILLIP S.(31745).SH

08/15/2008 SUCCESSFLJL SERVICE Methoc( : (A) 0.00 0.00CERTIFIED MAIL Issued : 08/11/2008Service : AMENDED COMPLAINTISSUED Served : 08/12/2008 Return08/13/2008 On : JOHN DOE PARTNERIN HOWLING ACRES Signed By :.IERRY CENTNENEO Reason : (A)SUCCESSFUL SERVICE Conmient :Traclting 4: 7160390198456359436

08/15/2008 SUCCESSFUL SERVICE Metlsod :(A) 0.00 0.00CERTIFIED MAI,L Issued : 08/I1/2008Service : AMENDED COMPLAINTISSIJED Served : 08/12/2008 Return08/13/2008 On : HOWLING ACRESKENNELS AND LAWN CARF, SignedBy : JERRY CENINENEO Reason : (A)SUCCESSFUL SERVICE Coi1liTieiit :Tracking # : 7160390198456359437

08/15/2008 SUCCESSFUL SERVICE Method :(A) 0.00 0.00CERTIFI:ED MAIL Issued : 08/11/2008Se vice : AMENDED COMPLAIN'I'ISSUED Served : 08/12/2008 Refurn08/13/2008 On : CENNENO, GERALDSigiied By : JERRY CENINENEO

littp://courts.tnahoningcount),oh.go%dpa/pa.urd/parnw2000.doc1cel_lst'?] 949981 10/15/2009


Reason : (A) SUCCESSFUL SERVICEComment : Tracking #7160390198456359435

08/11/2008 UPON MOTION AND GOOD 0.00 0.00GROUNDS SHOWN, DEFENDANT ISHBREBY GRANTED A THIRTY (30)DAY LEAVE OT MOVE OR PLEAD BYSEPTEMBER 1,2008 /S/DAD/DJD/LK

08/11/2008 Issue Date: 08/11/2008 Service: 0.00 0.00AMENDED COMPLAINT IS SUEDMetliod: (A) CERTIFIED MAIL Cost Per:$ 0.00 CENNENO, GERALD 711HOUSEL. CRAI=^T ROAD CORTLAND,OH 44410 Tracking No:7160390198456359435 JOHN DOEPARTNER IN HOWLING ACRESKENNELS AND LAWN CARE 711HOUSEL CRAFT ROAD CORTLAND,OH 4441.0 Tracking No:7160390198456359436 HOWLINGACRES KENNELS AND LAWN CARE711 HOLJSEL CRAFT ROADCORTLAND, OH 44410 Tracking No:7160390198456359437

08/08/2008 ADDITIONAL DI3FENDANTS Receipt: 10.00 0.00104707 Date: 08/ 11 /2008

08/08/2008 ADDITIONAL DEFENDAN'I'S Receipt: 10.00 0.00104707 Date: 08/11/2008

08/08/2008 CROSS COMPLAINT/ 15.00 0.00COUNTERCLAIM FILED BY Attorney:ARBIE, PHILLIP S. (31745) ONBEHALF OF THE, DEFENDAN'I' (ATANNF, UKRAINIAN BYZANTINECATHOLIC CIIURCH ANDADDITIONAL DEFENDAN"I'S./LKReceipt: 104707 Date: 08/11/2008

07/07/2008 SUCC'ESSFUL SERVICE Method : (A) 0.00 0.00CF,RTIF IED MAIL Issued : 07/02/2008Sei-vice : SUMMONS ISSUED Sei-ved :07/03/2008 Return : 07/07/2008 On : ST.ANNE UKRANIAN BYZANTINECATHOLIC CkIURCH Signed By: REVFR PETER'I'OMAS Reason : (A)SUCCESSFUL SERVICE Comment :Tracking 4:7160390198456359075

07/02/2008 Issue Date: 07/02/2008 Service: 0.00 0.00SIJMMONS ISSUED Method: (A)CERTIFIED MAIL Cost Per: $ 0.00 ST.

htCp://cow-ts.mahoningcount},oh.gov/pa/pa.urd,/parnw2000.docket 1st?1949981 10/15/2009

Ptiblic Access - Docket List Page 4of 4

ANNE UKRANIAN BYZANTINECATHOLIC CIIURCH 4310 KIRKROAD YOUNGSTOWN, OH 44511Trackiiig No: 7160390198456359075

07/01/2008 CONTRACT FILBD BY Ationiey: 125.00 0.00PRITCIIARD, WARREN BO (8417) -$11,000.00, INT & COSTS. BJT Receipt:101845 Date: 0 710 1 /20 0 8

bttp://courts_rnstboningcountyoh.govlpa/pa.urd/pamw2000.dockei_lst? 1949981 l 0/l 5l2009

IN THE COURT OF COM]lZONPLEAS

PROBATE DIVISION

CGLUMBI_AN'A COUNTY, 0I1I0

Ii "i THE MATTER OF T1IE ESTATE OF STEVE YANCSURAK

CASE NO. 2008 RE 000997LIDGIvIENT ENTRY

"I'his Release From Administratlon was before the Court on May 14, 2009 pursuant to

t_he. Court's orders of citation to show cause. Appaaing beiore the Court was DonnaYanscurak, the Applicant Attorney Warren Bo Pritchard, Commissioner and counsel for thisestate, was also ordered to appear. Attorney Pritchard failed to appear.

The Couit finds that Attorney Pritchard has failed to appear for the last two hearhngsand has been warned that his failure i.o appear would result in a finding of eontempt andappropriate sanctions including a warrant for his arrest.

The Court examined Ms, Yancsurak regarding the final distribution of the assetswhich were ordered released from adrninistration. There is evidence that the actual lifeinsurance proceeds received by the tln'ee beneficiaries were slightly greater than the amountsreleased due to accumulated interest. Ms. Yancsurak advised the Courtthat she has personalknowledge that he-husbaard and the remaining two beneficiaries have received theirdistaibution. Evidence of the distribution to Russell Yancsurak was reviewed by the Court..

The Couzt finds Warren Bo Pritchard in contempt of the Court's orders for hisrepeated failure to appear for hearings and to timely complete this Release FromAdministration.

It is therefore the Order of the Cou -t that this Release From Administration shall be

closed_ A warrant shall issue for the an-est of Attoraey W aaen Bo Pritchard, whose lastknown business address was 296 N. Niles-CanficId Road, Austintown, 01-144515. Uponapprehension of Attorney Pritchard, he shall be subject to release upon posting a'I'wo'I'housand Eive Hundred Dollar ($2,500.00) recognizance bond with the Coud and fu ther

upon the teiTns that:

a_ He shall appear before the Court as and wlien ordered for fu-i-ther heatmgs.b. IIe shall keep the Court advised at all times of his etm-erit residence and

mailing address, and his eun-ent telephonc number.

A certified copy of this Ordcr shall be delivered to the Co1u nbiana County CertifiedGrievance. Committee for the Connnittee's consideration.

DURING THE PENDENCY OF THIS CASE An'D UN'I'IL ALL COLTRTCOSTS ARE PAID IN FULL, EACH PARTY SHALL KEEP THE COU RT ADVISEDIN WRiTING OF THEIR CU.RRE?s'T RESIDEn'CE AND MAILING ADDRESS ANDANY TELEPHONE I^`UMBER.

COURT OF COMMON PLEAS, PROBA'TE DIVISIONCOLU112BIANA COUNTY, OHIO

BENCH WARRANT

STATE OF 01110,

COLUMBIANA COUNTI'

PROB A i'E COURT

CASE NO. 2008 RE 00099

IN THE MATTER OF: 'THE ESTATE OF STEVE YANCSURAK

PERSON TO BE SERVED: WARREN IIO PRITCHARD

TO: SHERIFF RAY STONE

It appearing to the Court this day of May, 2009 thal one:

Warren Bo Pritchai-d296 N. Nile,s-Canfield RoadAustintown, OH 44515

is in c.ontempt of the Court's Orders to appear and to timely complete this ReleaseFrom Administration.

PLEASE ADVIS'E THE COURT UPON APPREHENSION

THEREFORE, you are commanded to take the said Wai-i-en Bo Pritchard, iffound in your County. Upon apprehension of Warren Bo.Pritchard, he shall besubject to release upon posting a Two Thonsand Five Hundr-ed Dollar ($2,500.00)recognizance bond with the Court and further upon the terms that:

a. I£e shaft appear before the Court as and when ordered for fm-therheariu ;s.

b. He shall keep the Court advised at all times of his curreut residenccand maili-ng address, and his current telephone number.

WITNESS aty signature and the seal of saidûrton the day anchyear lastaforesaid. _

TH OTuÂS-M^331IZÒN Z.ZII'ROBATE JUDGE


COUNTY OF MAHONING

Now comes William DiRenzo, who first being duly sworn,

affirnied and cautioned according to law deposes and says that:

SS: WILLIAM DIRENZO

1. Attorney Warren Bo Pritchard ("Attorney Pritchard")

served

2006.

as my

as the legal counsel for me prior to February 1.0,

During Lhe period that Attorney Pritchard served

counsel, T learned that Attorney Pritchard had

property

Township,

Pritchard

for sale on State Route 46 in Austi.ntown

Mahoning County, Ohio. Thereafter, Attorney

reached an agreement with me for the purchase

of one lot known as Permanent Parcel 480400158000.

'PhereafLer, the lot was sold and transferred to me.

2. Subsequently, Attorney Pritchard informed me Lhat he was

anticipating selling more land in the area of my lot

(Parcel 480300158000) . I informed Attorney Pritchard

that I would in fact be iriteresLed in purchasing

adjoining lots when Attorney Pritchard was ready to sell

them. Sometime thereafter, Attorney Pritchard informed

me that he would sel.l to me a two acre adjoining lot for

the sum of $29,500.00. For reasons unknown to me,

Attorney Pritchard stated that he needed a deposit of

$28,000.00 that day, and asked me to make my check

payable to "Michael B. Dockry". Mr. Dockry is an

attorney licensed to practice law in the State of Ohio,

is the current Austintown Township Administrator, and

previously was a partner of, or shared office space with,

Attorney Pritchard.

3. I then obtained an officia:l. check (No. 3687217) from Sky

Bank in the amount of $28,000.00 for the two acre lot,

and delivered the check to Michael Dockry on November 28,

2006 as requested by ALtorney Pritchard. (See Exhibit D-

1.)

4. For several months thereafter, I repeatedly telephoned

Attorney Pritchard regarding the property transfer in

order to determine when the sale would be finalized and

I would receive his deed. I was assured by Attorney

P_ritchard that the paperwork would be completed soon.

5. On June 14, 2007, 1 obtained from Attorney Pritchard a

receipt for the purchase of the two acres and was assured

that the property would soori transfer into my name. (See

Exhibit D-2. ) At that time, I was happy to have the

matter moving forward and did not thoroughly review the

receipt. Instead, I relied on Att_orriey Pritchard's

representation that the receipt was documentation for the

purchase of Lhe two acres of land ttiat I was buyirig from

him. The receipt produced by Attorney Pritchard to me,

indicates that I paid Attorney Pritchard $29,500.00 for

°paymenton a parcel of land approximately two acres irom

-2-

the 17 acre parcel on Route-46 owrred or formally owned by

Bo Pritchard."

6. In June, when I still had not received the deed for my

property, I continued to attempt contacting Attorney

Pritchard. Later iri June, I was finally able to contact

Attorney Pritchard. Attorney Pritchard informed me that

I rieeded to pay additional money for the property so that

the deed could be transferred.

7. Specifically, I was instructed by Attorney Pritchard to

obtairi a second cashier's check. I did so ori June 20,

2009. This check, in the amount of $1,500.00, was

payable to Attorney Pritchard arrd was delivered to his

office. This check was cashed by Attorney Pritchard on

June 20, 2007. (See Exhibit D-3.)

8. After this final paymerit was made by me, I did not

receive a deed, and had difficulty getting Attorney

Pritchard to return my telephone calls. While the real

estate matters were ongoing, Attor.ney Pritchard and I

were involved in legal proceedings concerning the death

of my spouse.

9. When I did not receive a response from Attorney

Pritchard, I began looking at property that I was

supposed to be purchasing from Attorney Pritchard. At

that Lime, T learned that the two acres that I had

al legedly purchased from Attorriey Pritchard were acLually

-3-

in Lhe name of Carol and Ted Fye. I learned that the

property had been bought by the E'yes at a Sheriff's Sale

ori November 28, 2006, which coincidentally was the same

day that I had delivered the $28,000.00 pursuant to

Attorney Pritchard's request. Mrs. Fye bought 7.7.12 acres

(in three parcels) on Route 46 at the Sheriff's Sale

adjacent to the parcel currently owned by me.

10. According to the information received from the Mahoning

County Sheriff's office and my bank, the $28,000.00 check

that I had delivered to Mr. Dockry was negotiated by Mr.

Doclcry at First Place Bank on November 28, 2006. First

Place Bank then issued a check (No. 3003382) in the

amount of $29,500.00 payable to the Sheriff's Department

on November 28, 2006. That check showed "46 Partners"

as the remitter.

11. As stated previously, the Fyes purchased what I had

thought were my two acres of land at a Sheriff's Sale on

November 28, 2006. A deposit for Che F'ye sale was

$44,500.00. $29,500.00 caine from "46 Partners" and

$15,000.00 came from Carol Fye. At the time of the

purchase, the Eyes believed that the $29,500.00 delivered

to them at the Sheriff's Sale was a partial repayment of

money that they had advanced Attorney Pri'tchard in

September of 2005. Apparently, the Fyes had advanced

Attorney Pritchard $30,000.00.

-4-

12. To date, Attorney Pritchard has failed to either provide

the deed of sale to the property in question or return

the money to me.

Affiant has personal knowledge of all facts related in this



j'`' ca^^'-William Di.Renzo


c)- 7 fi day of October, 2009.

NOTARY PUBLIC

Notaiy "rubiic - Stat;; ui ^ii^ioMy Commision has no oxpiration date.

Section 147.03 RC.

DOCUMENT NOT SCANNEDPURSUANT TO SUPERINTENDENCE

RULE 45

No.

Received of

`Tulrra^^^l I^tNac tdSAlJ^C tYfc fYctMdP?!f^ too// 0 cDoflarS

1 o1' U Pd^l'7^ ra^ O et7 ^ d5 Rd a Cr^G ^©-f dv Cb d?OY..

^ 4-1 Cdt.^S ^Vto d't ^^G ^.r/l^c c2 C ^`4^^^_ ^j^ o^^+^C*^ ®vt ^o^zr°^r^vzLY c^a k+^ rr Fk^c^vt^'

PS FORM 4151


RULE 45


) SS: AMY DIDOMENICO

COUNTY OF MAHONING

Now comes Amy DiDomenico, who fi.rst being duly sworn, affirmed


1. On July 16, 2005, J & V Roofing and Home Iinprovement was

contracted to replace the roof on our (my husband Joseph

and my) house because of its age and condition. The roof

replacement was substandard and resulted in damages to

our home. Thereafter, we retained Attorney Anthony

Donofrio to file a complaint against J & V for breach of

contract, breach of warranty, and violations of Ohio's

Consumer Sales Practices Act.

2. Thereafter, for reasons unrelated to this complaint, we

became dissatisfied with our counsel and decided to

retain Attorney Warren Bo Pritchard ("Attorney

Pritchard") to represent us i_n the pending lawsuit which

had beeri filed in the Mahoriing County Court, Area No. 4.

(Case No. 200"7 CV F 1302.) Attorney Pritchard agreed to

represent us on September 15, 2007. At that time, we

paid Attorney Pritchard a retainer, fee of $850.00. A

notice of appearance was filed irr the case on December 4,

200"7. Attorney Pritchard failed to have us sign a

contingency fee agreement or otherwise come to an

agreement as to an hourly rate for his services.

3. On January 27, 2008, we paid Attorriey Pritchard $250.00.

Additional fees, in the amount of $600.00, were paid on

July 19, 2008. Allegedly, legal fees paid on July 19,

2008 were Lo cover witness/subpoena fees. Additional

court costs of $20.00 were paid directly to Court No. 4

on June 30, 2009. (See Exhibits E-2, E-3.)

4. On February 20, 2008, the case was called for a pretrial.

Counsel for both us and J & V were present. The court

ordered that discovery be completed in 90 days, and a

dispositive motion deadline was scheduled for 120 days

thereafter. The trial to the bench was scheduled for

five months. The court granted the plainLiffs' oral

motion to amend the complaint. The motion to dismiss

previously filed by the defendant and set for a non-oral

hearing was continued pending the filing of the amended

complaint.

5. On May 7, 2008, the court held a pretrial, and scheduled

the civil trial for August 8, 2008.

6. On May 9, 2008, we were to meet with Attorrrey Pritchard

aL his office at 4:30 p.m. Attorney Pritchard did not

appear for appointrnent at his office. We sat at Attorney

PriLchard's office parkinq loL for 45 minuLes before

Attorney Pritchard eventually called to cancel the

appointment.

7. On July 23, 2008, we again coriLacLed Attorney Pritchard

and left a message. He did not return this call.

B. On August 6, 2008, Attorney Pritchard voluntarily

dismissed our case without prejudice, pursuant to Ohio

Rule of Civil Procedure 41 (A) . The court closed its case

on August 11, 2008. (See court docket, Exhibit E-1.)

9. On August 7, 2008, we contacted Attorney Pritchard to

confirm the time and date of trial. At that time,

Attorney Pritchard informed us that the original court

date of August 8, 2009 was cancelled due to inaccuracies

in the filing process.

10. On September 11, 2008, we telephoned Attorney Pritchard

and his secretary said she would take a message and have

Attorney Pritchard return the call. Attorney Pritchard

never returned the call.

11. Ori September 15, 2008, we telephoned Attorney Pritchard

and left a message. Again, Attorney Pritchard did not

return this call.

12. On September 23, 2008, we again telephoned Attorney

Pritchard and left a message. Attorney Pritchar.d did not

immediately return this call. However, when we were

finally able to reach Attorney Pritchard by telephone,

Attorney Pritchard stated that he was ill and did not

have a secretary. In a second telephone conversation,

Attorney Pritchard stated that he had a teenager at home

who was ill and that he dicln't have a secretary anymore.

At that point, Attorney Pritchard also informed us that

a new trial could not be scheduled until the spring of

2009 because of "important" trials ahead of ours.

(Case No. 2007 CV F 1478)

13. On September 26, 2007, Attorney Pritchard filed a second

complaint against J & V Roofing in the Mahoning County

Court, Area No. 4(Case No. 2007 CVF 1478 on that court's

docket).

14. Orr October 3, 2007, the court noted that the defendant

had not been served, and notified Attorney Pritchard

ac,cordingly.

15. On July 28, 2008, defendant's counsel filed a motion to

withdraw.

16. Orr September 5, 2008, the court forwarded a request for

a case status to Attorney Pritchard. Not havirig received

a resporrse, Lhe court dismissed the case for failure to

appear and proceed, at plaintiffs' cost.

17. On September 11, 2008, we telephoned Attorney Pritchard's

office and spoke to his secretary. She stated that she

would take a rnessage and have Attorney Pritchard return

the call. Attorney Pritchard rrever returned this call.

18. On September 15, 2008, we telephoned Attorney Pritchard

and left a message. Again, Attorrrey Pritchard fai.l.ed to

return the call.

19. On March 6, 2009, we stoppcd by Attorney Pritchard's

office to ask if any progress had been made in refiling

the case. An appointment was scheduled for March 7,

2009.

20. On March 7, 2009, we appeared at Attorney Pritchard's

office for the scheduled appoinLment. At that time, we

quest_ioried Attorney Pritchard regarding his failure to

appear at the prior hearing. Attorney Pritchard stated

that he was going through a divorce, his wife had left

him and went to Las Vegas, and his files were

intentionall..y di_sorganized arrd/or tampered with.

Attorney Pritchard advised he would refile the complaint.

21. On March 13, 2009, we telephoned Attorney Pritchard. At

that time, we left a message on his answering machine,

but did not receive a response.

22. On March 14, 2009, we telephoned Attorney Pritchard. At

ttiat time, we left a message on his answering machine,

but did not receive a response.

23. On March 17, 2009, we contacted Attorney Pritchard's

office. At that time, they spoke to Attorriey Pritchard's

son who advised that he was acting as Attorney

Pritchard's secretary.

24. On March 19, 2009, Att.orney Pritchard telephoned us to

advise that the Magistrate was only in on Fridays.

Attorney Pritchard advised that the matter would proceed

in front of the Magistrate, and he would make a decisiori

whether to reiristate the case or whether we would have to

refile.

25. On March 19, 2009, Attorney Pritchard filed a motion to

vacate the court's judgment entry of dismissal of October

27, 2008.

26. On March 23, 2009, the court gave not.i.ce to the parties

that a hearing on the motion would be scheduled for April

24, 2009 at noon.

27. On April 16, 2009, we telephoned Attorney Pritchard to

determine if he had sufficient paperwork to support our

case. Attorney Pritchard returned the phone call and

stated that the hearing was non-oral and that the we did

not need to appear.

28. In the judgment entry of April 27, 2009, the court noted

that the case had been called for a non-oral hearing on

the plaintiffs' motion to vacate the order of dismissal

dated October 27, 2008. The court noted, however, that

no attorney for the defendant had been served with

plaintiffs' motion, and therefore continued the heari_ng

for 30 days.

29. On April 30, 2009, Attorney Pritchard was requested to

bring $20.00 to the court in order to permit service to

proceed.

30. On June 24, 2009, we telephoned the Court AdminisLrator,

and at that time learned Lhat Attorney Pritchard had not

paid the fee to perfect certified mail service. At that

ti-me, we called and spoke to Attorney Pritchard' s son who

advised that Attorney Pritchard was out of town and that

he would give him the message.

31. On Jurrc 29, 2009, we went to the court arid paid the

$20.00 court fee directly. Thereafter, we called

Attorney Pritchard several times and received a busy

signal at Attorney Pritchard's office. We were not able

to leave a message on an answering machine.

32. On June 30, 2009, the court scheduled a hearing on the

motion for AugusL 14, 2009 at 9:15 a.m.

33. Successful service on the defendarrt was made on July 14,

2009. On July 20, 2009, Attorney James Wise filed his

notice of substitution of counsel with the court.

34. On July 29, 2009, we forwarded a certified letter to

Attorney PriLchard reminding him of the pending trial.

To date, we have not received a response to the letter as

it was returned to sender unclaimed.

35. Attorney Pritchard did not appear for the court's

scheduled hearirrg on August 14, 2009.

36. The court treated the August 14 hearirrg as a pretrial,

and noted that discovery was to be completed in 60 days,

and that dispositive motions were to be filed in 90 days.

The court scheduled a trial to the bench in 120 days.

37. On August 20, 2009, the court scheduled the hearing on

our case for December 11, 2009. (See Exhibit E-1, a copy

of the court docket.)


General Inquiry

@D New Search...

5ummnrY ^r+ ties Fven1*: ^ Dockets ^ 1-1eIQS - ^ Ito1^s ^ Dist>osltloa ^ aosle.

Docket Search

50 2007 CV F 01302 AUS DIDOMENICO, JOSEPH D et aI VALENTINE, JOF-IN E

Search Gritci'ia

Docicet De.se. ALL

Itegin D:ttc

Dnd Date

Sort

C) Ascendi rtg

(i) Descending

^ Search

Search Results 23 Docket(s) found matching search criteria.

Doc4cet Docket Text Amount AmouiTC ImaqesDate Due

08/11/2008 NOW COMES TI-lE PLAINTIFF, BY 0.00 0.00AND'CHROUGH COUNSEL ANDPURSUAN'I' TO RULE 41 (A) OF'THEOHIO RULES OF CIVIL PROCEDURE,VOLUNTARILY DISMISSES THEABOVF: CAPTIONED MATTERWITHOU'C PREJUDICE. PLAIN'I'IFFSPECIFICALLY RESERVES THERIGHT TO RE-FILE THIS ACTION.EACH PARTY TO BEAR TI-IEIR OWNCOSTS. /S/DAI). SH

08/06/2008 NOTICE OF VOLUN"I'ARYAY 0.00 0.00DISMISSAL WPTHOUT PREJUDICEFILED BY Attorney: PRl'FCHARD,WARREN BO (8417).SI-I

08/06/2008 ATl'ORNEY PRITCI-IARD IS 0.00 0.00DISMISSING CASE. ENTRYFORTHCOMING. BJT

05/07/2008 HEARING SCHEDULED Event. CIVIL Q00 0.007'RIAL Daie: 08/08/2008 Tiine: 10:30 am.Iudge: DESANTO, DONALD Locaticn:COUNTY COURT # 4 Result:DISMISSED

0 2 /2212 0 0 8 LETTER RECEIVED FROM JOHN 0.00 0.00VALENTINO DBA J & V ROOFING^REQUSSTING 'I'HE COURT TO

Itttp://courts.matloningcountvoh.gov/palpa.w-d/pamw2000.docket _lst?43705828 I 0I14/2009

Public Access - Docket List

CHANGE HIS ADDRESS LISTED INLB.TTER. SH

02/20/2008 JUDGMENT ENTRY: CASE CALLED 0.00 0.00FOR PRE-TRIAL COUNSEL FORBOTI-I PARTIES PRESENT.DISCOVERY TO BE COMPLETED IN90 DAYS, DISPOSITIVE. MOTIONS IN120 DAYS. TRIAL TO THE BENCH IN5 MONTHS. ORAL MOTION OFPLAINTIFFS TO AMEND COMPLAINTGRANTED. PRIOR MO77ON TODISMISS FILED BY DEFENDANTAND PREVIOUSLY SET FOR NON-ORAL HEARING CONTINUED FORTHIRTY DAYS PENDING TI IE FILINGOF AN AMENDED COMPLAINT. /S!DAD/DJD/BJT

01/25/2008 MACiISTRATt? TOOK CASE UNDER 00 00ADVISEMENT. BJT

01/25/2008 MOTION TO CONSOLIDATE 0.00 0.00CERTIFICATION FILED BY Attorney:PRITCHARD, WARREN BO (8417)./LK

01/25/2008 PLAINTIFFS RESPONSE 1'O 0.00 0.00DEFENDANT'S MOTION TO DISMISSCERTIFICATION.ILK

12/28/2007 HEARING SCHEDULED Event: CIVIL 0.00 0.00HEARING Date: 01/25/2008 Time: 12:00pm Judge: DESANTO, DONALDLocation: COUNTY COURT # 4

12/11/2007 HEARING SCFIEDULED Event: CIVIL .00 .00PRE TRIAL Date: 02/08/2008 Time: 9:15am Judge: DESANTO, DONALDLocation: COUNTY COURT # 4

12/10/2007 JUDGMENTENTRY: PURSUANT TO .00 .00THE MOTION FILED BY COUNSEL,AND FOR GROUNDS AS STATEDTHEIZF.IN, THE PRP: TRIALSCHEDUI..ED FOR DF,CEMBER 28,2007 IS CONTINUED AND ORDEREDTO BE RESIL DAD/DJD/BJT

12/04/2007 NOTICE OF APPEARANCE FILED BY .00 .00Attorney: PRITCI-IARD, WARREN BO(8417) ON BEHALF OF PLAINTIFFSJOSEPH D. DIDOMENICO AND AMYA. DIDOMENICO. BJT

12/04/2007 MO'i'ION FOR CONTINUANCE FILED 0.00 .00BY Attorney: PR("i'CIIARD, WARRENBO (8417). BJT

11/27/2007 MOTION 'I0 DISMISS WRONG 0.00 0.00DEFENDANT AND SUBSTITUTE THEPROPER PARTY FILEI) BY Attorney:GIANNINI, MATTHEW (1522). BJT

11/20/2007 FIRST AMENDED ANSWER FILED BY 0.00 .00Attorney: GIANNINI, MATTHEW

Page 2 of 3

http://courts.niahoningcountyoh.gov/pa/pa.urd/pamw2000.docket lst?43705828 10/14/2009

Public Aeeess - Docket List

(1522). BJT

10/30/2007 HEARING SCHEDULED Event: CIVIL 0.00 0,00PRE TR1AL Date: 12/28/2007 Time:10:00 atn Judge: DESANTO, DONALDLocation: COUI 'i'Y COURT # 4 Result:CONTINUED Result: CONTINUED

10/26/2007 ANSWER ; AFFIRMATI VE DEFENSES 0.00 0.00FILED BY Attorney: GIANNINI,MATTHEW (1522).SH

10/I5/2007 JUDGNIENT ENTRY: UPON MOTION 0.00 0.00AND FOR GOOD CAUSE SHOWN,DEFENDANT, JOFIN E. VALENTIONDBA J & V ROOFING & HOMEIMPROVEMEN'I', IS HEREBYGRANTED LEAVE'PO FILE ANANSWER BY 11/16/07. /SIDADIDJD/BJT

10/09/2007 MOTION/LPAVE TO PLEAD FILED 0.00 0.00BY DEFENDANT, PRO SE. BJT

09/10/2007 SUCCESSFIJL SERVICE Method: (A) 0.00 0.00CERTIFIED MAIL Issued : 08/30/2007Service : SUMMONS ISSUED Served :09/06/2007 Return : 09/07/2007 OnVALENTINE, JOHN E Signed By :JOHN VALENTINO Reason : (A)SUCCESSFUI. SERVICE Cotnment:Tracking # : 7160390198498186617

08/30/2007 Issue Date: 08/30/2007 Service: 0.00 0.00SUMMONS ISSUED Method: (A)CER'PIFIED MAIL Cost Per: $ 0.00VALENTINE, JOHN E 309 CRIMSONCIRCLE CAMPBELL, OH 44405'I'racking No: 7160390198498186617

08/30/2007 CONTRACT -($7,531.21, INT & 125.00 0.00COSTS), COMPALIN'1' AND JURYDEMAND FILED BY Attorney:DONOFRIO, ANTIJONY (51849).SHReceipt: 82104 Date: 08/30/2007

Pa2e 3 of 3

http://cow-ts.i-rtahoningcountyoh.gov/pa/pa.urd/parriw2000.doclcet Ist?43705828 10/14/2009


RULE 45

ce

3410 2 7 4Noa

I-:)R rtiNl i /r /rDl1_-_/i -(,,f'i-

i [,+ , 0-

'-E 1- î

^ IGAS'J g.^.FPOPd-- -';G_

c;^âor.Ft ^ ZC

'îQRDE9 m Pti---

DOLLARS

1152UE

SH

u CHECh:

^ fVÔPJ ^ , EYCRDEK

Public Access - Case Surnniary

General Inquiry

Page I of I

hlew

i Surrama vL-nts Firrlds ^ tiotc: ^ DiSp^^sitior ^

Civil - Austintown - Summary

50 2007 CV F 01478 At7S DIDOMENICO, JOSEPH D et al VALENTINO, JOHN et al

PL/aINTIFF(s) DEFENDANT(s)

DIDOMBM CO, JOSEPH D VALENTINO, JOHN

Attorney(s) Attorney(s)

Full Nanie PRITCIIARD, WARREN BO Full Name WISE, JAMES R

Addi-ess 296 N CANFIELD NILES ROAD Address 6630 SEVILLE DR.

CitylState/Zip YOUNGSTOWN OH 44515 City/State7Zip CANFIELD Ol-l 4

Phone (330)799-4311 Phone (330)746-8484

CVF2 A CONTRACT TWO DEFENDANTS

Additional Fields

Case Attributes

Numbei- 50 2007 CV F 01478 AUS

Status CLOSED

Filed 09/26/2007Incomplete q

littp:/lcoul-fs.niahomiingcountv oh. go v/pa/pa. urd/pamu,2000.o_case_ surLi? 69992926 10/15/2009

Public Access - Docket List Page I of 4

General Inquiry

New St

Srts. ^ .tbl.c:s ^; C1i+,_;Pn,:itior-c

Docket Search

50 2007 CV F 01478 AUS DIDOMENICO, JOSEPIT D et al VALENTINO, JOHN et al

Search Criteria

Docl<etJ)ese. ALL

Begin Date

End Date

Sort

( ) Ascending(eiiDescending

Search

Search Results 26 Docket(s) found matching search criteria,

Docket Docket Text Amount lkmount imsgesDate Due

08/20/2009 HEARING SCIIEDULED Event: CIVILTRTAL Date: 12/11/2009 Time: 9:45 amJudge: DESANTO, DONALD Location:COLJNTY COURT # 4

08/17/2009 JUDGMENT ENTRY: CASE CALLEDFOR I IEARING. MATTER TREATEDAS PRE-TRIAL. DISCOVERY TO BECOMLPLE'I'ED IN 60 DAYS.DISPOSITIVE MOTIONS 'I'O 13E FILEDIN 90 DAYS. TRIAL TO THE BENCIIIN 120 DAYS. /S/ DAD/DJD/BJT

07/27/2009 ANSWER FILED (DEFT) BY Attorney:WISE, JAMES R (39046).SH

07/20/2009 NOTICE OF SI7BSTI'I'UTION OFCOUNSEL (FOR DEFENDANT) FILEDBY Attorney: WISE, JAMES R (39046).BJT

07/14/2009 SUCC.ESSFIIL SERVICE Method : (A)CERTIFIED MAIL Issued : 06/30/2009

0.00 0.00

0.00 0.00

0.00 0.00

0.00 0.00

0.00 0.00

httl3://courts. inahoningcountyoll. gov,^pa/pa. urd/pamw2000. docket_lst?69992926 10/15/2009


Service : SUMMONS ISSUED Served07/10/2009 Return : 07/10/2009 On : JV ROOFING & HOME IMPROVEMENTINC Signed By : K ROGERS Reason :(A) SUCCESSFUL SERVICE Conunent :T'racking #:7160390198458485323

07/14/2009 SUCCESSFUL SERVICE Method : (A) 0.00 0.00CERTIFIED MAIL Issued : 06/30/2009Service : SUMMONS ISSUED Served :07/10/2009 Return : 07/10/2009 On :VALENTINO, JOI-IN Signed By : KROGERS Reason : (A) SUCCESSFULSERVICE Comment : Traclcing # :7160390198458485324

07/08/2009 COPIES Receipl: 126331 Date: 1.70 0.0007/08/2009

06/30/2009 Issuc Date: 06/30/2009 Service: 0.00 0.00SUMM6NS ISSUED Method: (A)CERTIFIED MAIL Cost Per: $ 0.00 J&V ROOFING & HOME IMPROVEMENTINC 332 DEER CREEK DRIVESTRUTHERS, OH 44471 Tracking No:7160390198458485323 VALENTINO,JOHN 332 DEER CREEK DRIVESTRUTHERS, OH 44471 'I'racking No:7160390198458485324

06/30/2009 HEARING SCHEDIJLED Event: CIVIL 0.00 0.00IIEARING Date: 08/14/2009 Time: 9:15am Judge: DESANTO, DONALDLocation: COUNTY COURT # 4

06/30/2009 ALIAS REQUEST/CERT MAIL FILED 10.00 0.00BY PLAINTIFF. BJT Receipt: 125707Date: 06/30/2009

06/30/2009 ALIAS REQUEST/CERT MAIL FILED 10.00 0.00BY PLAIN'IIFF. BJT Receipt: 125707Date: 06/30/2009

04/30/2009 I SPOKE TO ATTORNEY PRITCHARD_ 0.00 0.00IIE WILL BRIN G IN $20.00 WITIIMOTION FOR CERTIFIED MAILSERVICE AT NEW ADDRESS. BJT

04/27/2009 JUDGMENT ENTRY: CASE CALLED 0.00 0.00FOR NON-ORAL HL:AR]NG ONPLAiNTIFF'S MOTION TO VACATETHE ORDER OF DISMISSAL DATED10/27/08. 'I`IIE CERTIFICAT'E OFSERVICE OF SUCN MOTIONINDICATES SERVICE TO ATTORNEYMATTHEW C. GIANINNI WHO WAS

littp://courts.inahoriingcounryoh.gov/pa/pa.urd/pamw2000.doclceL lst?69992926 10/15/2009

Public Access - DockeL List

GR ANTED LEAVE TO WTTHDRAWBY ENTRY DATED 8/4/08.ATTORNEY JOSEPH RAFIDI'S NAMEDOES NOT APPEAR ON THEDOCKET. ACCORDINGLY. THEREHAS BEEN NO SERVICE OFPLAINTIFF'S MOT'ION ON EITF3ERDEFENDANT. CASE CON'I'INUEDFOR 30 DAYS FOR SERVICE. /S/DAD/DJD/BJ"I'

03/27/2009 NOTICE OF LTE.ARING RETURNED: 0.00 0.00NOT DELIVERABLF_, AS ADDRESSED.SH

03/27/2009 NOTICE OF HEARING RETURNED: 0.00 0.00NOT' DELIVERABLE AS ADDRESSED.SH

03/23/2009 HEARING SCHEDULED Event: CIVIL 0.00 0.00HEARIN G Date: 04/24/2009 'fime: 12:00pm Judge: DESANTO, DONALDLocation: COUNTY COURT # 4

03/19/2009 MOTION TO VACATE JUDGMENT 0.00 0.00FILED BY Attorney: PRITCIIARD,WARREN BO (8417).SH

10/27I2008 JUDGMENT ENTRY: CASE 0.00 0.00DISMISSED AT PLAINTTFF'S COSTSFOR FAILURE TO APPEAR ANDPROCEED. /S/ DAD/BJT

09/05/2008 REQUEST FOR CASE STAT'US SENT 0.00 0.00TO ATTORNEY AND/OR PLAINTIFF.STATUS OF CIVIL CASE Sent on:0910512008 14:29:32

07/28/2008 MOTION TO WITHDRAW AS 0.00 0.00COtTNSEL FILED BY Attorney:GIANNINI, MATTHEW (1522) (FORDEFENDA-NTT, JOHN EVALENTINE)./LK (/S/DAD ON 8/4/08)

10/03/2007 FAILURE OF SERVICE SENT TO 0.00 0.00ATTY AND/OR PLAINTIFF. BJT

1 010 312 0 0 7 UNSUCCESSFUL SERVICE Metliocl : 0.00 0.00(A) CERTIFIED MAIL Issued :09/26/2007 Service : SUMMONSISSUED Served : Return : 10/01/2007On : J& V ROOFIN G& IIOMEIMPROVEMENT INC Signed By:Rcason : (A) UNSUCCESSFULSERVICE Convment : FORWARDINGADDRESS EXPIRED: 309 CRIMSONCIR, CAMP Tracking # :

Page 3 of 4

http://coi.u-ts.mahoningcountyoh.gov/pa/pa.urd/pamw2000.docket_tst?69992926 I 0 /1 512 00 9

Public Aceess - Docket List Page 4 of 4

716039019849818680909/28/2007 UNSUCC'ESSFUL SERVICE Niethod : 0.00 0.00

(A) CERTIFJED MAIL Issued :09/26/2007 Service : SUMMONSISSUED Served : Return : 09/28/2007On : VALENTINO, JOAN Signed ByReason : (A) UNSUCCESSFULSERVICE Comment :FORWARD TIMEEXP/NEW ADDRESS Tracking #:7160390198498186808

09/26/2007 Issue Date: 09/26/2007 Service: 0.00 0.00SUMMONS ISSUED Method: (A)CERTIFIED MAIL Cost Per: $ 0.00VALEN'I'INO, JOHN 307 CRIMSONCIRCLE CAMPBELL, OH 44405Ti-aclcing No: 7160390198498186808 J &V ROOFING & HOME IMPROVEMENTINC 305 CRIMSON CIRCLECAMPBELL, OII 44405 Traclcing No:7160390198498186809

09/26/2007 ADDITIONAL DEFENDANTS Receipt: 10.00 0.0083821 Date: 09/26/206

09/26/2007 CONTRACT- ($7,500.00, INT &COSTS), FILED BY Attorney:PRITCHARD, WARREN BO (8417).SHReceipt: 83821 Date: 09/26/2007

125.00 0.00

http:l/courts.rnahoningcourtyoh.gov/pa/pa.urd/pamw2000.docket Ist?69992926 10/15/2009


) SS: EVELYN SUE LORENT

COUNTY OF MAHONING

Now comes Evelyn Sue Lorent, who first being duly sworn,

affirmed and cautioned according to law deposes and says that:

1. On April 3, 2009, I retained Attorney Warren Bo Pritchard

("Attorney Pritchard") Lo provide 1.ega1. advice to ine

regarding the filing of a possible bankruptcy and in

relation to a probate matter. I paid to Attorney

Pritchard the total sum of $1,300.00, in three separate

payments. (See Exhibits F-1, F-2, and F-3.) I also

provided documents to Attorney Pritchard necessary for

him to review ttie issues presented by me.

2. Ttiereafter, I attempted to contact Attorney Pritchard on

numerous occasions. I was unable to do so. I also

forwarded a certified letter to Attorney Pritchard's home

without receiving a response.

3. On September 21, 2009, I filed a grievance with the

Mahoning County Bar Association having not heard from

Attorney Pritchard in more than five months. As of

today's date, Attorney Pritchard has failed to provide

ai-y form of legal assistance to me. Attorney Pritchard

has also failed to return my files to nie despite my

repeated requests to do so.

EXHIBIT

4. Attorney Pritchard has failed to refund my payment for

legal services to be rendered by him.



FURTHER AFFIANT SAYETH NAiJGH'P.


^.- day of October, 2009.

DAVID C. COMriOCK, JR., Attorn ^ J a? ).,aNotary Public • State of Ohio

My Cornmislon has no s>(pirailon tlato.S°ction 147.US R.C.


RULE 45


) SS: CAROL HOVANES

COUNTY OF' MAHONING

Now comes Carol. Hovancs, who first being duly sworn, affirmed


1. On July 21; 2008, Lhe Bank of New York filed a complaiirt

in foreclosure against me.

2. 'I'he complaint was served upon me on or about August 11,

2008.

3. Thereafter, I consulted with Attorney Warren Bo Pritchard

("Attorney Pritchard"), a long-t.i.me acquaintance, for

legal advice relating to the foreclosure action.

4. In addition to stating that he would protect my interests

in the foreclosure matter, Attorney Pritchard also

recommended to me that I file bankruptcy.

5. To represent me in both the foreclosure and bankruptcy

matters, At_torney Pritchard charged me the sum of

$1,300.00, which 1: paid to him.

6. After receiving the funds, Attorney Pritchard filed a

motion for leave to move or plead on my behalf on or

about September 8, 2008. This motion was granted by the

Court on September 23, 2008. No other document has been

filed by Attor"ney Pritcfiard in the foreclosure case.

7. Thereafter, I continued to receive bills in the mail,

collection letters, and telephone calls from both

collection agencies and attorneys seeking payment on my

debts.

8. As a result of these inquiries, I contacted Attorney

Pritchard regarding the status of my bankruptcy.

9. At_torriey Pritchard advised me that he had forgotten to

file my bankruptcy. Nonetheless, Attorney Pritchard also

advised me that before I could declare bankruptcy, I

would need to take a debt counseling course. This was

the first time Lhat I had received this instruction.

10. I then enrolled i.n a consumer credit counselirig course.

Upon completion, I again attempted to coritact Attorney

Pritchard regarding the status of my bankruptcy, as well

as foreclosure case.

11. I made numerous and repeated telephone calls to Attorney

Pritchard. For a period of time, I attempted to contact

Attorney Pritchard every day. No telephone call was ever

returned by Attorney Pritchard.

12. I also forwarded a letter to Attorney Pritchard

requesting a status report regarding my case. Attorney

Pritchard did not reply to this letter ei.ther_.

7.3. To date, Attorney Pritchard has failed to keep me

informed regarding the status of my foreclosure case, has

not filed a bankruptcy petition, and has failed to

respond to any collection inquiry by attorneys or debt

collectors. Attorney Pritchard has failed to return to

me the original $1,300.00 fee, or any part thereof.

14. I have now secured new counsel to represent me in

connection with my pending foreclosure case and intended

bankruptcy petition.

15. The next scheduled hearirig in the foreclosure matter is

January 7, 2010.




Carol Hovanes


-2^ V?,_ day of October, 2009.

016ari f„7. ?^Mrw;, ilotary Pubf.Sta,e ai Oh;o

i,^y OOtr,, r,c, ;nn ! e%^/„


) SS: DUANE AND TRACIE CORLL

COUNTY OF MAHONING

Now comes Duane and Tracie Corll, who first being duly sworn,

affirmed and cautioned according to law depose and say that:

1. In July of 2008, we initially met with Attorney Warren Bo

Pritchard (°AtLorney Pritchard") . The purpose of the

meeting was to discuss our financial status, arid the

potential filing of a bankruptcy petition on our behalf.

2. AtLorney Pritchard inforrned us that he would charge us a

fee of $1,300.00 for the bankruptcy case. We made an

initial installment at our first meeting, and by the end

of August 2008, we had paid Attorney Pritchard in full.

3. During that period, we began filling out information

which was required for the bankruptcy petition. We also

took the credit counseling course which was required

prior to the filing of the bankruptcy. Both the

documents and course work were completed before December

of 2008.

4. As stated previously, we obtained the informatiori

originally requested by Attorney Pritchard. All of Lhe

information, and related documentation, were L.urned irito

Attorney Pritchard. By December of 2008, Attorney

Pritchard had lost the documents which we had provided to

him, and requested that we again fill out the

information.

5. As time progressed, we had a more difficult time reaching

Attorney Pritchard. When we were finally able to coritact

hint again, Attorney Pritchard informed us that we needed

to put the bankruptcy off until after we had filed our

income taxes in 2009.

6. At Attorney Pritchard's suggestion, we waited to file our

bankruptcy. As time progressed, it became more and more

difficult to reach Attorney Pritchard by telephone or by

stopping at his office.

/. Eventually, Tracie was able to locate Attorney Pritchard

in his off.i..ce on May 19, 2009. At that time, 7'racie

pushed the subject of the filing of the bankruptcy

petition. Attorney Pritchard sta'ted that he did not

underst.and why it was a problem because we were not

paying any of our bills.

8. }^ollowing that conversation and the specific instructions

by Tracie that we wanted our bankruptcy completed,

Attorney Pritchard filed the petition that same day (May

19, 2009), almost six months after we had £i_rst

approached him.

9. The first hearing was schedul.ed on July 14, 2009.

10. The day before the bankruptcy hearing, Attorney Pritchard

informed us that we needed to provide our tax information

-2-

at the time of the hearing. Because we were unab].e to

obtain the requested material quickly (due to the late

notice), the hearing was rescheduled.

11. A second hearing was scheduled on July 28, 2009.

Attorney Pritchard never appeared for this hearing. The

trearing was again rescheduled.

12. The third hearing was scheduled on August 11, 2009. The

hearing proceeded as scheduled. Followirig the hearing,

we completed our post-barrkruptcy court class.

13. However, at that time we were not able to contact

Attorney Pritchard by either phorre or by stopping at his

office.

14. We also attempted to locate Attorney Pritchard at the

Austintown Township Trust_ee office, because he is a

Township Trustee.

15. Another hearing was scheduled in the banlcruptcy court on

September 24, 2009. This hearing was rescheduled because

we were not ab7e to produce the requested documents. We

spent a week, prior to the hearing, attenrpting to locate

Attorney Pri_tchard to speak to him about the new court

hearing.

16. When Attorney Pritchard was eventually contacted, he

informed us that we did not need to worry about the

hearing, and that we did not need to attend - that he

would take care of the hearing.

3

17. F'rom September 24, 2009 to the present, we have attempted

to contact Attorney Pritchard ori numerous occasions.

Despite numerous attempts, there has been no contact

between Attorney Pritchard arid us.

18. On October 3, 2009, we received a l.etter from the United

States Bankruptcy Court indicating LhaL the case had been

closed without discharge because we did not timely file

a statement ce.rti.fyirig completion of an instructional

course.

19. In the same letter, the notice listed companies that the

we had not provided sufficient contact information for as

part of the bankruptcy filing. However, this information

had originally been provided to Attorney Pritchard. This

information was apparently lost by Attorney Pritchard.

In fact, the companies for which Attorney Pri_tchard tiad

no information are ttrose that we provided to him twice.

(See paragraph 4 above.)

20. Additionally, because Attorney Pritchard took so lorig to

file our bankruptcy case, we had to retake the cr_edit

counseling course in April of 2009. Attorney Pritchard

did pay for this course, however.

21. As of today's date, our bankruptcy petiLion has not been

refiled. We are seeking new legal counsel to represent

us in our bankruptcy case.

-4-



FURTHER AFFTANT SAYETH NAUGHT.

AA<VvIA.i

Duane Corll

Tracie Corll



RELATOR'S EXHIBITS The Lorent Matter 23 The Hovanes …voicemail available), (330) 799-4311...

Documents

Transcript of RELATOR'S EXHIBITS The Lorent Matter 23 The Hovanes …voicemail available), (330) 799-4311...