Cleveland Bar Ass'n v. Sweeney

656 N.E.2d 619, 74 Ohio St. 3d 44
Ohio Supreme Court·Decided November 22, 1995·No. No. 95-1198·Published·Cited by 5 cases

Opinion

Per Curiam.

Upon review of the record, we concur in the board’s findings of misconduct and its recommendation. Respondent is therefore suspended indefinitely from the practice of law in Ohio, and his reinstatement is conditioned upon proof of complete reimbursement to the Clients’ Security Fund. Moreover, we add the further condition that, prior to any application for reinstatement, respondent shall also make full restitution to those clients whose claims have not been paid by the Clients’ Security Fund, -with interest at the legal judgment rate. 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

Cleveland Bar Ass'n v. Sweeney, 656 N.E.2d 619, 74 Ohio St. 3d 44 (Ohio 1995).

656 N.E.2d 619 (Cleveland Bar Ass'n v. Sweeney) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related