Cincinnati Bar Ass'n v. Reis

715 N.E.2d 1128, 86 Ohio St. 3d 540
Ohio Supreme Court·Decided September 8, 1999·No. No. 99-836·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

Per Curiam.

We adopt the findings, conclusions, and recommendation of the board. Respondent engaged in a pattern of neglect and deceit, failed to return her clients’ property and funds upon request, and failed to cooperate in the ensuing disciplinary investigations. In addition, we have previously indefinitely suspended respondent from the practice of law due to a comparable pattern of client neglect. Cincinnati Bar Assn. v. Reis (1997), 80 Ohio St.3d 124, 684 N.E.2d 1214. Absent any mitigating circumstances, respondent’s pattern of misconduct and appropriation of client funds and property warrant disbarment. See, e.g., Cincinnati Bar Assn. v. Wolosin (1999), 84 Ohio St.3d 401, 402, 704 N.E.2d 566, 568. Respondent is hereby permanently disbarred from the practice of law in Ohio. Costs taxed to respondent.

Judgment accordingly.

Moyer, C.J., Douglas, Resnick, E.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

Cincinnati Bar Ass'n v. Reis, 715 N.E.2d 1128, 86 Ohio St. 3d 540 (Ohio 1999).

715 N.E.2d 1128 (Cincinnati Bar Ass'n v. Reis) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Cincinnati Bar Assn. v. Reis
1999 Ohio 195 (Ohio Supreme Court, 1999)