Disciplinary Counsel v. Booher

Ohio Supreme Court

Disciplinary Counsel v. Booher

1997 Ohio 65, 79 Ohio St. 3d 1223

CourtOhio Supreme Court

DecidedJuly 9, 1997

Docket1995-2554

StatusPublished

This text of 1997 Ohio 65 (Disciplinary Counsel v. Booher) 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. Booher, 1997 Ohio 65, 79 Ohio St. 3d 1223 (Ohio 1997).

Pincite

Opinion

[This opinion has been published in Ohio Official Reports at 79 Ohio St.3d 1223.]

OFFICE OF DISCIPLINARY COUNSEL v. BOOHER. [Cite as Disciplinary Counsel v. Booher, 1997-Ohio-65.] (No. 95-2554—Submitted and decided July 9, 1997.) ON APPLICATION FOR REINSTATEMENT. __________________ {¶ 1} This cause came on for further consideration upon the filing of an application for reinstatement by respondent Michael R. Booher, a.k.a. Michael Robert Booher, Attorney Registration No. 0007694, last known address in Middletown, Ohio. {¶ 2} The court coming now to consider its order of May 29, 1996, wherein the court, pursuant to Gov.Bar R. V(6)(B)(3), suspended respondent for a period of one year, finds that respondent has substantially complied with that order and with the provisions of Gov.Bar R. V(10)(A). Therefore, {¶ 3} IT IS ORDERED by this court that Michael R. Booher, a.k.a. Michael Robert Booher, is hereby reinstated to the practice of law in the state of Ohio. {¶ 4} IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Clerk of this court issue certified copies of this order as provided for in Gov.Bar R. V(8)(D)(1), that publication be made as provided for in Gov.Bar R. V(8)(D)(2), and that respondent bear the costs of publication. {¶ 5} For earlier case, see Disciplinary Counsel v. Booher (1996), 75 Ohio St.3d 509, 664 N.E.2d 522. MOYER, C.J., DOUGLAS, RESNICK, F.E. SWEENEY, PFEIFER, COOK and LUNDBERG STRATTON, JJ., concur. __________________

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

[This opinion has been published in Ohio Official Reports at 79 Ohio St.3d 1223.]

OFFICE OF DISCIPLINARY COUNSEL v. BOOHER. [Cite as Disciplinary Counsel v. Booher, 1997-Ohio-65.] (No. 95-2554—Submitted and decided July 9, 1997.) ON APPLICATION FOR REINSTATEMENT. __________________ {¶ 1} This cause came on for further consideration upon the filing of an application for reinstatement by respondent Michael R. Booher, a.k.a. Michael Robert Booher, Attorney Registration No. 0007694, last known address in Middletown, Ohio. {¶ 2} The court coming now to consider its order of May 29, 1996, wherein the court, pursuant to Gov.Bar R. V(6)(B)(3), suspended respondent for a period of one year, finds that respondent has substantially complied with that order and with the provisions of Gov.Bar R. V(10)(A). Therefore, {¶ 3} IT IS ORDERED by this court that Michael R. Booher, a.k.a. Michael Robert Booher, is hereby reinstated to the practice of law in the state of Ohio. {¶ 4} IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Clerk of this court issue certified copies of this order as provided for in Gov.Bar R. V(8)(D)(1), that publication be made as provided for in Gov.Bar R. V(8)(D)(2), and that respondent bear the costs of publication. {¶ 5} For earlier case, see Disciplinary Counsel v. Booher (1996), 75 Ohio St.3d 509, 664 N.E.2d 522. MOYER, C.J., DOUGLAS, RESNICK, F.E. SWEENEY, PFEIFER, COOK and LUNDBERG STRATTON, JJ., concur. __________________

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

1997 Ohio 65, 79 Ohio St. 3d 1223, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/disciplinary-counsel-v-booher-ohio-1997.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack