MOUNT VERNON — Council for the Board of Commissioners on Grievances and Discipline has requested Scott Pullins’ request for remand be overruled.
In documents filed last week with the Ohio Supreme Council, disciplinary council Michael Murman said Pullins’ request was filed 14 days after the original deadline to file objections. In addition, Murman stated Supreme Court rules allow for only one argument of objection. Pullins filed his original objection June 3.
“The rules apply to the recent decision cited by [Pullins] as a basis for remand that contains argument, including citations to other cases,” Murman said.
Under the same reasoning, Murman asked the court to strike Pullins’ request for judicial review of a decision filed by the Knox County Court of Appeals.
Murman further stated the panels which heard the disciplinary case did not find reason to question Pullins’ “mental competency.”
“Accordingly, the request for remand for the purpose of having respondent examined by a psychiatrist is not well taken,” he said.
In documents filed Monday, Pullins asked the Supreme Court to strike Count 4 of the original complaint of misconduct, which revolves around Pullins’ issue of subpoenas on a case that had been stayed by the Knox County Court of Common Pleas.
Pullins said the issues with Count 4 were already investigated and found to be without merit.
“It is clear that the board heavily relied upon this count in their recommendation and report for which [I] was seriously prejudiced and harmed,” Pullins stated.
Because Pullins feels Count 4 has already been addressed by the courts, he has requested sanctions for frivolous conduct be placed against Murman.
“It is well settled law in Ohio that an attorney that files a claim or complaint barred by Res Judicata (a judgment or final ruling), is subject to sanctions for frivolous conduct. The same is true in a disciplinary action; in fact, such an act might even constitute prosecutorial misconduct,” Pullins said.
Requests with the clerk’s office of the Ohio Supreme Court as to when decisions would be rendered on this filing have yet to be answered.