Columbus Bar Ass'n. v. Fodor

Ohio Supreme Court

Columbus Bar Ass'n. v. Fodor

175 Ohio St. (N.S.) 21

CourtOhio Supreme Court

DecidedJune 5, 1963

DocketD. D. No. 41

StatusPublished

This text of 175 Ohio St. (N.S.) 21 (Columbus Bar Ass'n. v. Fodor) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Ohio Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Columbus Bar Ass'n. v. Fodor, 175 Ohio St. (N.S.) 21 (Ohio 1963).

Pincite

Opinion

Per Curiam.

This court, from a consideration of the record, is of the opinion that the board was neither in error nor unreasonable in its recommendation. Therefore, the objections are overruled, the report of the board is confirmed, and judg[24]*24ment is rendered suspending respondent for an indefinite period from the practice of law.

Report confirmed and judgment accordingly.

Taft, C. J., Zimmerman, Matthias, Smith, Griffith, Herbert and Gibson, JJ., concur. Smith, J., of the Sixth Appellate District, sitting by designation in the place and stead of O’Neill, J.

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

Per Curiam.

This court, from a consideration of the record, is of the opinion that the board was neither in error nor unreasonable in its recommendation. Therefore, the objections are overruled, the report of the board is confirmed, and judg[24]*24ment is rendered suspending respondent for an indefinite period from the practice of law.

Report confirmed and judgment accordingly.

Taft, C. J., Zimmerman, Matthias, Smith, Griffith, Herbert and Gibson, JJ., concur. Smith, J., of the Sixth Appellate District, sitting by designation in the place and stead of O’Neill, J.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

175 Ohio St. (N.S.) 21, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/columbus-bar-assn-v-fodor-ohio-1963.