Disciplinary Counsel v. Goldberg

Ohio Supreme Court

Disciplinary Counsel v. Goldberg

719 N.E.2d 964, 87 Ohio St. 3d 1447, 1999 Ohio LEXIS 3914

CourtOhio Supreme Court

DecidedNovember 18, 1999

Docket99-1638

StatusPublished

This text of 719 N.E.2d 964 (Disciplinary Counsel v. Goldberg) 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. Goldberg, 719 N.E.2d 964, 87 Ohio St. 3d 1447, 1999 Ohio LEXIS 3914 (Ohio 1999).

Pincite

Opinion

On September 10, 1999, this court imposed an interim remedial suspension against respondent, Richard Dennis Goldberg, Attorney Registration No. 0005748, last known address in Canfield, Ohio, pursuant to Gov.Bar R. V(5a)(B). On October 7, 1999, respondent filed a motion for dissolution or modification of interim suspension. On October 18, 1999, relator filed a motion to seal relator’s response to respondent’s motion to dissolve and a response to respondent’s motion for dissolution. Upon consideration thereof,

IT IS ORDERED by this court that respondent’s motion for dissolution or modification of interim suspension be, and hereby is, denied.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that relator’s motion to seal be, and hereby is, granted and that relator’s response to respondent’s motion for dissolution be, and hereby is, placed under seal.

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

On September 10, 1999, this court imposed an interim remedial suspension against respondent, Richard Dennis Goldberg, Attorney Registration No. 0005748, last known address in Canfield, Ohio, pursuant to Gov.Bar R. V(5a)(B). On October 7, 1999, respondent filed a motion for dissolution or modification of interim suspension. On October 18, 1999, relator filed a motion to seal relator’s response to respondent’s motion to dissolve and a response to respondent’s motion for dissolution. Upon consideration thereof,

IT IS ORDERED by this court that respondent’s motion for dissolution or modification of interim suspension be, and hereby is, denied.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that relator’s motion to seal be, and hereby is, granted and that relator’s response to respondent’s motion for dissolution be, and hereby is, placed under seal.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

719 N.E.2d 964, 87 Ohio St. 3d 1447, 1999 Ohio LEXIS 3914, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/disciplinary-counsel-v-goldberg-ohio-1999.