BY BEN L. KAUFMAN
The Cincinnati Enquirer
An aggressive lawyer-advertiser is in trouble because his firm offered to represent a dead man.
That client-solicitation complaint is one of three accusations against Arnold S. Levine or a member of his Cincinnati firm, lawyer Cliff G. Linn.
All accusations were investigated by the Butler County Bar Association under Ohio's Code of Professional Responsibility for lawyers.
The bar association found "misconduct" and forwarded the allegations to the Ohio Supreme Court's Board of Commissioners on Grievances and Discipline.
The board set a hearing for Jan. 22. After that, each complaint will be dismissed or sent to the Supreme Court with a non-binding recommendation for disciplinary action.
The complaint about the direct mail solicitation to a dead man came from Randy G. Hatton, of Fairfield. His stepson, Kevin P. Webb, died in a traffic accident in January 1997.
Mr. Hatton told the bar association, "My wife and I were appalled" by "the absolute and total insensitivity that we were subjected to by Mr. Levine."
He said it was apparent that "Mr. Levine did not even bother to determine that our son was killed in the accident nor did he even think about what effect such a letter would have on his immediate family. . . . Mr. Levine should be punished."
The "atrocious" letter arrived about a month after the crash, Mr. Hatton said, and it tore a new hole into his family fabric.
Mr. Hatton said he called the Levine law firm, and "those people act like you're a . . . moron."
Overstepped rules
Police reports reviewed by the bar association clearly indicated that Mr. Webb died in the crash, and the bar association said the letter overstepped rules governing lawyer advertising and client solicitation.
Mr. Levine refused to comment last week, referring questions to his Columbus attorney, Mark H. Aultman. He conceded that "it can be upsetting" to open such a letter as Mr. Webb's family received, but that the solicitation did not violate state code.
The reports were not as clear as the bar association indicated, Mr. Aultman said, and the employee who took Mr. Webb's name from accident reports should have been more careful because Mr. Levine "doesn't want to solicit dead persons."
The second accusation is evoking laughter from some lawyers on the sidelines because it was initiated by Eugene M. Rothchild, another aggressive lawyer-advertiser.
Mr. Rothchild said Mr. Levine's form letters suffered from a fatal omission and an unseemly promise, and both violated the state code:
They lacked the required red-letter alert, ADVERTISEMENT ONLY, on envelopes and letterheads.
Letters contained what Mr. Rothchild said was an improper "predetermined evaluation" that cases were worthwhile when they said, "During your free consultation, we will tell you whether or not, in our opinion, you have a case, and what we think it may be worth."
Mr. Levine conceded the red-letter omission, as did Mr. Linn, who signed the direct mail solicitations, the bar association said.
Mr. Levine attributed it to an oversight by the clerk who was supposed to endorse both with a rubber stamp and his firm was shifting to envelopes with ADVERTISEMENT ONLY printed on them.
Mr. Levine denied any predetermined evaluation and said the language in his letters conformed to state codes.
However, the bar association held Mr. Levine accountable because Mr. Levine is senior member of the firm and "supervised and maintained executive control . . . over the direct mailing program."
The third accusation said the letters failed to "accurately and fully state the manner in which the law firm became aware of and verified the identity and specific legal needs" of the people to whom they were sent.
The bar association said Mr. Levine and Mr. Linn defended the text, saying co-workers get information from police traffic reports and are trained to figure out who are "non-at-fault injury victims" to be contacted.
In an interview last week, Mr. Rothchild said he filed his complaint after being criticized for problems with his own letters.
Mr. Rothchild said he escaped discipline but was warned the board was keeping an eye on his mailings.
"If they're going to talk tough to me, talk tough to the rest of the lawyers," he said.
Mr. Rothchild said there was nothing personal in his "technical complaint" against Mr. Levine.
On the other hand, Mr. Rothchild dismissed Mr. Hatton's complaint about the letter to his dead stepson. Ethically, "I see nothing wrong with doing it," he said, although it was a waste of time. "The dead person can't hire you."
