Cincinnati Bar Ass'n v. Freedman

551 N.E.2d 143, 49 Ohio St. 3d 65, 1990 Ohio LEXIS 60
Ohio Supreme Court·Decided February 21, 1990·No. No. 89-1237·Published·Cited by 2 cases

Opinions

Per Curiam.

Respondent intended to, and for a short time did, thwart the administration of justice. He obtained and kept contraband which he knew the federal authorities, armed with a search warrant, sought. This is a [67] serious crime. Therefore, we agree with the board’s findings of fact and conclusions of law, but order that respondent be permanently disbarred. Costs taxed to respondent.

Judgment accordingly.

Moyer, C.J., Sweeney, Holmes, Douglas, Wright and Resnick, JJ., concur. H. Brown, J., dissents.

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

Cincinnati Bar Ass'n v. Freedman, 551 N.E.2d 143, 49 Ohio St. 3d 65, 1990 Ohio LEXIS 60 (Ohio 1990).

551 N.E.2d 143 (Cincinnati Bar Ass'n v. Freedman) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Disciplinary Counsel v. Cohen
32 N.E.3d 455 (Ohio Supreme Court, 2015)
Disciplinary Counsel v. Young
807 N.E.2d 317 (Ohio Supreme Court, 2004)