On Wednesday, May 14, 2025, the Ohio Disciplinary Counsel filed a complaint against attorney William Anthony Paxton alleging violations of the Ohio Rules of Professional Conduct. The complaint, submitted to the Board of Professional Conduct of the Supreme Court of Ohio, accuses Paxton of submitting inaccurate fee-application forms for court-appointed legal work in Summit County Juvenile Court.
The case is entitled “Disciplinary Counsel v. William Anthony Paxton,” with case no. 2025-005.
Paxton, whose law practice primarily focused on representing juveniles in delinquency and contempt cases, as well as serving as court-appointed counsel or guardian ad litem in abuse, neglect, and dependency cases, reportedly derived about 80% of his practice from such appointments. The remaining 20% consisted of general private practice. He was compensated at $40 per hour for out-of-court work and $50 per hour for in-court work. To receive payment, Paxton was required to submit standardized fee-application forms, which included details such as the client’s name, case number, charged offense, assigned judge, hours worked, and fees requested. These forms, created by the Ohio Public Defender Commission, required certification that the listed hours and fees were accurate and that no duplicate payments were sought.
According to the complaint, Paxton did not maintain contemporaneous time records for his court-appointed cases. Instead, he reconstructed time estimates by reviewing case dockets, pleadings, hearing notices, emails, phone logs, and text messages. This practice led to the submission of certified fee-application forms that reported excessive hours, including two days—May 1, 2019, and July 1, 2019—where he billed over 24 hours (25 and 26.7 hours, respectively).
Notably, Paxton later admitted in a letter to the Disciplinary Counsel that he was on vacation on May 1, 2019. The 2019 audit by Summit County and the Ohio Public Defender’s Office also identified eight days where Paxton billed between 20 and 24 hours and 18 days where he billed between 16 and 20 hours. Additionally, the audit uncovered duplicate billing in three cases due to Paxton submitting two fee applications for the same work.
The complaint alleges that Paxton’s actions violated Rule 8.4(c) of the Ohio Rules of Professional Conduct, which prohibits lawyers from engaging in conduct involving dishonesty, fraud, deceit, or misrepresentation. The issue came to light after Summit County noticed discrepancies in billing among court-appointed counsel and consulted the Ohio Public Defender’s Office, which recommended an audit. The 2019 audit, followed by a 2022 review by the Ohio Public Defender, prompted then-State Public Defender Timothy Young to file a grievance against Paxton.
During the investigation, Paxton acknowledged errors in some of his billings and admitted to the duplicate submissions. To address the overbilling, he agreed to pay restitution for hours billed above 16 per day in 2019 and 2020, totaling 93.6 hours. Using a hybrid rate of $45 per hour for in-court and out-of-court time, Paxton and the Disciplinary Counsel agreed on a restitution amount of $4,212.
The complaint requests that the Board of Professional Conduct find Paxton in violation of the professional conduct rules and impose appropriate sanctions.
According to Avvo.com, Mr. Paxton is a family attorney in Maryville, Tennessee. He attended the University of Akron, C. Blake McDowell Law Center, graduating in 1988. He acquired his law license in Ohio in 1989.
A copy of the original filing can be found here.
