Akron Bar Ass'n v. Goodlet

Ohio Supreme Court

Akron Bar Ass'n v. Goodlet

435 N.E.2d 1116, 70 Ohio St. 2d 140

CourtOhio Supreme Court

DecidedJune 9, 1982

DocketD.D. No. 82-16

StatusPublished

Cited by3 cases

This text of 435 N.E.2d 1116 (Akron Bar Ass'n v. Goodlet) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Ohio Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Akron Bar Ass'n v. Goodlet, 435 N.E.2d 1116, 70 Ohio St. 2d 140 (Ohio 1982).

Pincite

Opinion

Per Curiam.

One of the fundamental tenents of the professional responsibility of a lawyer is that he or she “ * * * should maintain a degree of personal and professional integrity that meets the highest standard. The integrity of the pro[142]*142fession can be maintained only if the conduct of the individual attorney is above reproach. * * * ” Cleveland Bar Assn. v. Stein (1972), 29 Ohio St. 2d 77, 81.

As respondent himself has admitted, his actions demonstrate that he was guilty of misconduct in his handling of the estate and that the emotional and financial problems which he encountered are not justification for his conduct.

After a careful examination and review of the entire record in this cause, this court concurs with the findings and conclusions of the board that respondent violated the foregoing Disciplinary Rules.

Accordingly, it is the judgment of this court that respondent be suspended from the practice of law in this state for a period of one year, and it is so ordered.

Judgment accordingly.

Celebrezze, C. J., W. Brown, Sweeney, Locher, Holmes, C. Brown and Krupansky, JJ., concur.

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