Cincinnati Bar Assn. v. Kathman

Ohio Supreme Court

Cincinnati Bar Assn. v. Kathman

2002 Ohio 1050, 94 Ohio St. 3d 1240

CourtOhio Supreme Court

DecidedFebruary 19, 2002

Docket2000-1865

StatusPublished

This text of 2002 Ohio 1050 (Cincinnati Bar Assn. v. Kathman) 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. Kathman, 2002 Ohio 1050, 94 Ohio St. 3d 1240 (Ohio 2002).

Pincite

Opinion

[This decision has been published in Ohio Official Reports at 94 Ohio St.3d 1240.]

CINCINNATI BAR ASSOCIATION v. KATHMAN. [Cite as Cincinnati Bar Assn. v. Kathman, 2002-Ohio-1050.] (No. 00-1865—Submitted and decided February 19, 2002.) ON APPLICATION FOR REINSTATEMENT. __________________ {¶ 1} This cause came on for further consideration upon the filing of an application for reinstatement by respondent, Edward T. Kathman, Attorney Registration No. 0055446, last known business address in Cincinnati, Ohio. {¶ 2} The court coming now to consider its order of June 13, 2001, 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 Edward T. Kathman 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. Kathman (2001), 92 Ohio St.3d 92, 748 N.E.2d 1091. MOYER, C.J., DOUGLAS, RESNICK, F.E. SWEENEY, PFEIFER, COOK and LUNDBERG STRATTON, JJ., concur. __________________

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

[This decision has been published in Ohio Official Reports at 94 Ohio St.3d 1240.]

CINCINNATI BAR ASSOCIATION v. KATHMAN. [Cite as Cincinnati Bar Assn. v. Kathman, 2002-Ohio-1050.] (No. 00-1865—Submitted and decided February 19, 2002.) ON APPLICATION FOR REINSTATEMENT. __________________ {¶ 1} This cause came on for further consideration upon the filing of an application for reinstatement by respondent, Edward T. Kathman, Attorney Registration No. 0055446, last known business address in Cincinnati, Ohio. {¶ 2} The court coming now to consider its order of June 13, 2001, 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 Edward T. Kathman 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. Kathman (2001), 92 Ohio St.3d 92, 748 N.E.2d 1091. MOYER, C.J., DOUGLAS, RESNICK, F.E. SWEENEY, PFEIFER, COOK and LUNDBERG STRATTON, JJ., concur. __________________

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

2002 Ohio 1050, 94 Ohio St. 3d 1240, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/cincinnati-bar-assn-v-kathman-ohio-2002.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack