Cleveland Bar Ass'n v. Vann

168 Ohio St. (N.S.) 481
Ohio Supreme Court·Decided February 4, 1959·No. D. D. No. 8·Published

Opinion

Per Curiam.

Although we do not condone in the ■ slightest degree the misconduct of respondent, we are of the opinion that, under the circumstances of this case and in view of the previous good conduct of respondent as revealed by the record, the discipline recommended by the board is unduly severe. Such discipline is therefore reduced to a public reprimand, conditioned upon respondent’s paying all the costs of the proceeding instituted as a result of his misconduct, including any expense incurred by his client in obtaining the refund of her money.

The report of the board, as modified, is confirmed and judgment is rendered accordingly.

Report modified and, as modified, confirmed and judgment accordingly.

Weygandt, C. J., Zimmerman, Stewart, Matthias, Bell and Herbert, JJ., concur. Taet, J., dissents from that part of the judgment which modifies the report of the board.

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

Cleveland Bar Ass'n v. Vann, 168 Ohio St. (N.S.) 481 (Ohio 1959).

168 Ohio St. (N.S.) 481 (Cleveland Bar Ass'n v. Vann) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.