Columbus Bar Ass'n v. Wright

568 N.E.2d 1218, 58 Ohio St. 3d 126, 1991 Ohio LEXIS 691
Ohio Supreme Court·Decided March 27, 1991·No. No. 90-1146·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

Per Curiam.

We adopt the findings and recommendations of the board, but modify the sanction based on information received at oral argument that respondent is afflicted with alcohol addiction. Accordingly, we suspend respondent from the practice of law in this state for two years, but stay eighteen months of that suspension and place respondent on probation on condition that he receive treatment for his alcohol addiction and that the probation be supervised and monitored by relator as provided in Gov. Bar R. V(23). Costs taxed to respondent.

Judgment accordingly.

Moyer, C.J., Sweeney, Holmes, Douglas, H. Brown and Resnick, JJ., concur. Wright, J., not participating.

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

Columbus Bar Ass'n v. Wright, 568 N.E.2d 1218, 58 Ohio St. 3d 126, 1991 Ohio LEXIS 691 (Ohio 1991).

568 N.E.2d 1218 (Columbus Bar Ass'n v. Wright) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Disciplinary Counsel v. O'Brien
899 N.E.2d 125 (Ohio Supreme Court, 2008)