Cincinnati Bar Assn. v. Hauck

Ohio Supreme Court

Cincinnati Bar Assn. v. Hauck

2012 Ohio 5271, 979 N.E.2d 345, 133 Ohio St. 3d 1232

CourtOhio Supreme Court

DecidedNovember 15, 2012

Docket2011-0023

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 2012 Ohio 5271 (Cincinnati Bar Assn. v. Hauck) 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

Cincinnati Bar Assn. v. Hauck, 2012 Ohio 5271, 979 N.E.2d 345, 133 Ohio St. 3d 1232 (Ohio 2012).

Pincite

Opinion

{¶ 1} This cause came on for further consideration upon the filing of an application for reinstatement by respondent, John Wesche Hauck, Attorney Registration No. 0023153, last known business address in Cincinnati, Ohio.

{¶ 2} The court coming now to consider its order of July 7, 2011, wherein the court, pursuant to Gov.Bar R. V(6)(B)(3), suspended respondent from the practice of law for a period of 12 months, with six months stayed on conditions, and its order of March 5, 2012, wherein the court found respondent in contempt for failure to comply with this court’s July 7, 2011 order and revoked the six-month stay of the original suspension and suspended respondent from the practice of law for a period of six months pursuant to Gov.Bar R. V(6)(B)(3), finds that respondent has substantially complied with those orders and with the provisions of Gov.Bar R. V(10)(A).

{¶ 3} Therefore, it is ordered by this court that respondent is reinstated to the practice of law in the state of Ohio.

{¶ 4} It is further ordered that on or before 30 days from the date of this order, relator shall file with the clerk of this court the name of the attorney who will serve as respondent’s monitor, in accordance with Gov.Bar R. V(9). It is further ordered that at the end of respondent’s probationary period, relator shall file with the clerk of this court a report indicating whether respondent, during the probationary period, complied with the terms of the probation.

{¶ 5} It is further ordered that at the end of the probationary period, respondent may apply for termination of probation as provided in Gov.Bar R. V(9). It is further ordered that respondent’s probation shall not be terminated until (1) respondent files an application for termination of probation in compliance with Gov.Bar R. V(9)(D), (2) respondent complies with this and all other orders issued by this court, (3) respondent complies with the Rules for the Government of the Bar of Ohio, (4) relator files with the clerk of this court a report indicating that respondent has complied with the terms of the probation, and (5) this court orders that the probation be terminated.

{¶ 6} 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 *1233 provided for in Gov.Bar R. V(8)(D)(2), and that respondent bear the costs of publication.

O’Connor, C.J., and Pfeifer, Lundberg Stratton, O’Donnell, Lanzinger, Cupp, and McGee Brown, JJ., concur.

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

{¶ 1} This cause came on for further consideration upon the filing of an application for reinstatement by respondent, John Wesche Hauck, Attorney Registration No. 0023153, last known business address in Cincinnati, Ohio.

{¶ 2} The court coming now to consider its order of July 7, 2011, wherein the court, pursuant to Gov.Bar R. V(6)(B)(3), suspended respondent from the practice of law for a period of 12 months, with six months stayed on conditions, and its order of March 5, 2012, wherein the court found respondent in contempt for failure to comply with this court’s July 7, 2011 order and revoked the six-month stay of the original suspension and suspended respondent from the practice of law for a period of six months pursuant to Gov.Bar R. V(6)(B)(3), finds that respondent has substantially complied with those orders and with the provisions of Gov.Bar R. V(10)(A).

{¶ 3} Therefore, it is ordered by this court that respondent is reinstated to the practice of law in the state of Ohio.

{¶ 4} It is further ordered that on or before 30 days from the date of this order, relator shall file with the clerk of this court the name of the attorney who will serve as respondent’s monitor, in accordance with Gov.Bar R. V(9). It is further ordered that at the end of respondent’s probationary period, relator shall file with the clerk of this court a report indicating whether respondent, during the probationary period, complied with the terms of the probation.

{¶ 5} It is further ordered that at the end of the probationary period, respondent may apply for termination of probation as provided in Gov.Bar R. V(9). It is further ordered that respondent’s probation shall not be terminated until (1) respondent files an application for termination of probation in compliance with Gov.Bar R. V(9)(D), (2) respondent complies with this and all other orders issued by this court, (3) respondent complies with the Rules for the Government of the Bar of Ohio, (4) relator files with the clerk of this court a report indicating that respondent has complied with the terms of the probation, and (5) this court orders that the probation be terminated.

{¶ 6} 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 *1233 provided for in Gov.Bar R. V(8)(D)(2), and that respondent bear the costs of publication.

O’Connor, C.J., and Pfeifer, Lundberg Stratton, O’Donnell, Lanzinger, Cupp, and McGee Brown, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

2012 Ohio 5271, 979 N.E.2d 345, 133 Ohio St. 3d 1232, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/cincinnati-bar-assn-v-hauck-ohio-2012.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack