Cincinnati Bar Ass'n v. Florez

2003 Ohio 7291, 101 Ohio St. 3d 1207
Procedural entryThis page is a short order in Cincinnati Bar Ass'n v. Florez. Read the opinion of the Court — 98 Ohio St. 3d 448
Ohio Supreme Court·Decided December 26, 2003·No. 2001-1816·Published

Opinion

{¶ 1} This cause came on for further consideration upon the filing of an application for reinstatement by respondent, Michael G. Florez, Attorney Registration No. 0010693, last known business address in Cincinnati, Ohio.

{¶ 2} The court coming now to consider its order of April 16, 2003, wherein the court, pursuant to Gov.Bar R. V(6)(B)(3), suspended respondent for a period of six months, finds that respondent has substantially complied with that order and with the provisions of Gov.Bar R. V(10)(A). Therefore,

{¶ 3} IT IS ORDERED by this court that respondent be, and hereby is, reinstated to the practice of law in the state of Ohio.

{¶ 4} IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Clerk of this court issue certified copies of this order as provided for in Gov.Bar R. V(8)(D)(1), that publication be made as provided for in Gov.Bar R. V(8)(D)(2), and that respondent bear the costs of publication.

{¶ 5} For earlier case, see Cincinnati Bar Assn. v. Florez, 98 Ohio St.3d 448, 2003-Ohio-1730, 786 N.E.2d 875.

Moyer, C.J., Resnick, F.E. Sweeney, Pfeifer, Lundberg Stratton, O’Connor and O’Donnell, JJ., concur.

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

Cincinnati Bar Ass'n v. Florez, 2003 Ohio 7291, 101 Ohio St. 3d 1207 (Ohio 2003).

2003 Ohio 7291 (Cincinnati Bar Ass'n v. Florez) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Cincinnati Bar Ass'n v. Florez
786 N.E.2d 875 (Ohio Supreme Court, 2003)