Disciplinary Counsel v. Baumgartner

762 N.E.2d 366, 94 Ohio St. 3d 1447, 2002 Ohio LEXIS 290
CourtOhio Supreme Court
DecidedFebruary 1, 2002
Docket02-65
StatusPublished
Cited by2 cases

This text of 762 N.E.2d 366 (Disciplinary Counsel v. Baumgartner) 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
Disciplinary Counsel v. Baumgartner, 762 N.E.2d 366, 94 Ohio St. 3d 1447, 2002 Ohio LEXIS 290 (Ohio 2002).

Opinion

Upon consideration of relator’s motion for leave to file a reply to respondent’s memorandum opposing motion for interim remedial suspension,

IT IS ORDERED by the court that the motion be, and hereby is, denied.

Lundbekg Stratton, J., dissents. Resnick, J., not participating.

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

Related

in re:E. Baumgartner v.
123 F. App'x 200 (Sixth Circuit, 2005)
Office of Disciplinary Counsel v. Baumgartner
100 Ohio St. 3d 41 (Ohio Supreme Court, 2003)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
762 N.E.2d 366, 94 Ohio St. 3d 1447, 2002 Ohio LEXIS 290, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/disciplinary-counsel-v-baumgartner-ohio-2002.