ARDC closes file on complaint against MTCA attorney

February 21, 2009 – Saying the complaint filed on February 2 by a former president of Marina Towers Condominium Association “does not contain any new information,” the Attorney Registration and Disciplinary Commission has again declined to take further action against MTCA attorney Ellis Levin.

In late December, Marina City Online editor Steven Dahlman filed a complaint against Levin with the ARDC, alleging professional misconduct in Levin’s handling of a dispute between MCO and the condo association. Levin responded to the complaint through an attorney and in February, the ARDC declined to take further action, saying the complaint lacked sufficient evidence of misconduct.

The second complaint was filed by Dr. Martin Flynn, who was on the MTCA board of directors from 2000 to 2002, alleging Levin single-handedly kept him from running for re-election in 2006 by not accepting a copy of the warranty deed for his condo unit as proof of ownership.

Levin (left, in 1985 photo) has represented MTCA on and off since 1992. He is a former state legislator, representing the 12th District in the Illinois House from 1977 to 1995.

In his response to the ARDC decision, Flynn, an anesthesiologist who currently lives in Venice, California, noted issues related to the disputes could, as the ARDC pointed out, be negotiated privately or in the courts. “And if lawyers only charged the same as I do to save lives, I might have been able to afford a protracted battle with the MTCA and Levin, who is well known for protracting in the courts.”

Flynn says both Levin and current MTCA president Donna Leonard are using their legal skills and funding provided by MTCA condo owners “to maliciously circumvent both the letter and spirit of the law. To zealously advocate for a client is one thing, to act in a manner inconsistent with an ethical duty to the law is, to this layman, certainly another.”

It does not appear that Levin was required to respond to the second complaint. Flynn has asked the ARDC for “a greater understanding of why [the ARDC] didn’t read my complaint and why Mr. Levin is not required to answer to the specifics of my misconduct allegations to the ARDC, just as he did not answer my numerous requests in the past.”