Dayton Bar Ass'n v. Kemper

Ohio Supreme Court

Dayton Bar Ass'n v. Kemper

175 Ohio St. (N.S.) 285

CourtOhio Supreme Court

DecidedNovember 20, 1963

DocketD. D. No. 38

StatusPublished

This text of 175 Ohio St. (N.S.) 285 (Dayton Bar Ass'n v. Kemper) 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

Dayton Bar Ass'n v. Kemper, 175 Ohio St. (N.S.) 285 (Ohio 1963).

Pincite

Opinions

Per Curiam.

Upon oral argument in this court, defense counsel suggested that respondent might be mentally ill. No suggestion of mental illness was made during the hearings before the board and no proof was offered tending to establish such fact. Prom a consideration of the record, this court is of the opinion that the board was neither in error nor unreasonable in its findings and recommendation. Although respondent was not personally present during the oral argument in this court, he testified at the hearing before the board and was represented by counsel at the hearing on the merits and on the objections to the recommendations of the board.

Report confirmed and judgment accordingly.

Taft, C. J., Zimmerman, Matthias, O’Neill, Griffith and Gibson, JJ., concur.

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

Per Curiam.

Upon oral argument in this court, defense counsel suggested that respondent might be mentally ill. No suggestion of mental illness was made during the hearings before the board and no proof was offered tending to establish such fact. Prom a consideration of the record, this court is of the opinion that the board was neither in error nor unreasonable in its findings and recommendation. Although respondent was not personally present during the oral argument in this court, he testified at the hearing before the board and was represented by counsel at the hearing on the merits and on the objections to the recommendations of the board.

Report confirmed and judgment accordingly.

Taft, C. J., Zimmerman, Matthias, O’Neill, Griffith and Gibson, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

175 Ohio St. (N.S.) 285, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/dayton-bar-assn-v-kemper-ohio-1963.