Akron Bar Ass'n v. Bonetti

658 N.E.2d 250, 74 Ohio St. 3d 204
Ohio Supreme Court·Decided January 10, 1996·No. No. 95-1667·Published·Cited by 5 cases

Opinion

Per Curiam.

Upon review of the record, we concur in the board’s findings that respondent violated DR 1-102(A)(3) and (6). We also agree with the sanction recommended by the board. Respondent is therefore suspended for two years from the practice of law in Ohio; however, we suspend both years of the sanction period and place respondent on probation under the conditions established by the board. Costs taxed to respondent.

Judgment accordingly.

Moyer, C.J., Douglas, Wright, Resnick, F.E. Sweeney, Pfeifer and Cook, JJ., concur.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Akron Bar Ass'n v. Bonetti, 658 N.E.2d 250, 74 Ohio St. 3d 204 (Ohio 1996).

658 N.E.2d 250 (Akron Bar Ass'n v. Bonetti) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Akron Bar Assn. v. Meyer
1999 Ohio 3 (Ohio Supreme Court, 1999)
Akron Bar Assn. v. Bonetti
1998 Ohio 493 (Ohio Supreme Court, 1998)