Cincinnati Bar Ass'n v. Wolosin

Ohio Supreme Court

Cincinnati Bar Ass'n v. Wolosin

646 N.E.2d 455, 71 Ohio St. 3d 611

Ohio Supreme Court·Decided March 22, 1995·No. No. 94-1375·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

Per Curiam.

We have thoroughly reviewed the record and agree with the board’s findings of misconduct and its recommendation. Respondent is therefore suspended from the practice of law in Ohio for two years, but the suspension is [614]*614stayed, and respondent is placed on probation under the conditions set by the board. Costs taxed to respondent.

Judgment accordingly.

Moyer, C.J., Douglas, Wright, Resnick, F.E. Sweeney, Pfeifer and Cook, JJ., concur.

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

Per Curiam.

We have thoroughly reviewed the record and agree with the board’s findings of misconduct and its recommendation. Respondent is therefore suspended from the practice of law in Ohio for two years, but the suspension is [614]*614stayed, and respondent is placed on probation under the conditions set by the board. Costs taxed to respondent.

Judgment accordingly.

Moyer, C.J., Douglas, Wright, Resnick, F.E. Sweeney, Pfeifer and Cook, JJ., concur.

Cincinnati Bar Ass'n v. Wolosin, 646 N.E.2d 455, 71 Ohio St. 3d 611 (Ohio 1995).

Pincite

646 N.E.2d 455 (Cincinnati Bar Ass'n v. Wolosin) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related