Disciplinary Counsel v. Lehmkuhl

2014 Ohio 2172, 11 N.E.3d 1189, 139 Ohio St. 3d 1235
Procedural entryThis page is a short order in Disciplinary Counsel v. Lehmkuhl. Read the opinion of the Court — 137 Ohio St. 3d 71
Ohio Supreme Court·Decided May 23, 2014·No. 2012-1719·Published

Opinion

{¶ 1} This cause came on for further consideration upon the filing of an application for reinstatement by respondent, Phillip Douglas Lehmkuhl, Attorney Registration No. 0021246, last known business address in Mt. Vernon, Ohio.

{¶ 2} The court coming now to consider its order of March 27, 2014, wherein the court suspended respondent from the practice of law until respondent paid all costs and accrued interest in full, finds that respondent has substantially complied with that order and with the provisions of Gov.Bar R. V(10)(A).

{¶ 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(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.

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

Disciplinary Counsel v. Lehmkuhl, 2014 Ohio 2172, 11 N.E.3d 1189, 139 Ohio St. 3d 1235 (Ohio 2014).

2014 Ohio 2172 (Disciplinary Counsel v. Lehmkuhl) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.