Disciplinary Counsel v. Ford

2016 Ohio 5914, 63 N.E.3d 1212, 147 Ohio St. 3d 1220
CourtOhio Supreme Court
DecidedSeptember 22, 2016
Docket2011-2042
StatusPublished

This text of 2016 Ohio 5914 (Disciplinary Counsel v. Ford) 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. Ford, 2016 Ohio 5914, 63 N.E.3d 1212, 147 Ohio St. 3d 1220 (Ohio 2016).

Opinion

{¶ 1} This cause came on for further considération upon the filing of an application for reinstatement by respondent, George Cook Ford III, Attorney Registration No. 0011982, last known address in Norwalk, Ohio.

{¶ 2} The court coming now to consider its order of September 5, 2012, wherein the court, pursuant to former Gov.Bar R. V(6)(B)(3), suspended respondent from the practice of law for a period of two years with six months stayed on conditions, finds that respondent has substantially complied with that order and with the provisions of Gov.Bar R. V(24).

{¶ 3} Therefore, it is ordered by this court that respondent is 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(17)(D)(1) and that publication be made as provided for in Gov.Bar R. V(17)(D)(2).

{¶ 5} For earlier case, see Disciplinary Counsel v. Ford, 133 Ohio St.3d 105, 2012-Ohio-3915, 976 N.E.2d 846.

O’Connor, C.J., and Pfeifer, O’Donnell, Lanzinger, Kennedy, French, and O’Neill, JJ., concur.

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

Related

Disciplinary Counsel v. Ford
2012 Ohio 3915 (Ohio Supreme Court, 2012)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
2016 Ohio 5914, 63 N.E.3d 1212, 147 Ohio St. 3d 1220, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/disciplinary-counsel-v-ford-ohio-2016.