Cleveland Bar Ass'n v. Briggs

728 N.E.2d 1049, 89 Ohio St. 3d 74
Ohio Supreme Court·Decided May 24, 2000·No. No. 99-1576·Published·Cited by 7 cases

Opinions

Per Curiam.

We adopt the findings and conclusions of the board. As we said in Warren Cty. Bar Assn. v. Bunce (1998), 81 Ohio St.3d 112, 115, 689 N.E.2d 566, 568, ‘When imposing a sanction, we will consider not only the duty violated, but the lawyer’s mental state, the actual injury caused, and whether mitigating factors exist.” Based on our review of the record and noting that respondent has already been censured by the probate court, we suspend respondent from the [76] practice of law for one year, with the entire year stayed. During the year of stayed suspension respondent shall be on probation and her legal practice monitored by an attorney selected by and reporting regularly to the relator. Costs are taxed to respondent.

Judgment accordingly.

Douglas, Resnick, F.E. Sweeney, Pfeifer and Lundberg Stratton, JJ., concur. Moyer, C.J., and Cook, J., dissent.

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

Cleveland Bar Ass'n v. Briggs, 728 N.E.2d 1049, 89 Ohio St. 3d 74 (Ohio 2000).

728 N.E.2d 1049 (Cleveland Bar Ass'n v. Briggs) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Iowa Supreme Court Attorney Disciplinary Board v. David A. Morse
887 N.W.2d 131 (Supreme Court of Iowa, 2016)
Disciplinary Counsel v. O'Neill
815 N.E.2d 286 (Ohio Supreme Court, 2004)
Cleveland Bar Assn. v. Briggs
2000 Ohio 441 (Ohio Supreme Court, 2000)