Columbus Bar Ass'n v. Hartwell
520 N.E.2d 226, 35 Ohio St. 3d 258, 1988 Ohio LEXIS 59
Opinion
This court finds that respondent violated the aforementioned Disciplinary Rules indicated by the board. Respondent’s conduct, particularly with respect to Count I, however, requires a more severe sanction than that recommended. Such conduct undermines the integrity of the judicial system. Accordingly, respondent is hereby suspended from the practice of law in Ohio for one year. Costs taxed to respondent.
Judgment accordingly.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Columbus Bar Ass'n v. Hartwell, 520 N.E.2d 226, 35 Ohio St. 3d 258, 1988 Ohio LEXIS 59 (Ohio 1988).
520 N.E.2d 226 (Columbus Bar Ass'n v. Hartwell) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
Disciplinary Counsel v. Oviatt.
2018 Ohio 5091 (Ohio Supreme Court, 2018)
Disciplinary Counsel v. Shimko
2012 Ohio 5694 (Ohio Supreme Court, 2012)
Disciplinary Counsel v. Stafford
2012 Ohio 909 (Ohio Supreme Court, 2012)
Office of Disciplinary Counsel v. Gardner
793 N.E.2d 425 (Ohio Supreme Court, 2003)
Office of Disciplinary Counsel v. West
706 N.E.2d 760 (Ohio Supreme Court, 1999)
Columbus Bar Ass'n v. Hartwell
539 N.E.2d 608 (Ohio Supreme Court, 1989)