Disciplinary Counsel v. Santarelli

Ohio Supreme Court

Disciplinary Counsel v. Santarelli

675 N.E.2d 1246, 78 Ohio St. 3d 1406, 1997 Ohio LEXIS 3848

CourtOhio Supreme Court

DecidedFebruary 25, 1997

Docket96- 2874

StatusPublished

This text of 675 N.E.2d 1246 (Disciplinary Counsel v. Santarelli) 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. Santarelli, 675 N.E.2d 1246, 78 Ohio St. 3d 1406, 1997 Ohio LEXIS 3848 (Ohio 1997).

Pincite

Opinion

On December 31, 1996, movant, Disciplinary Counsel, filed a Motion for Order to Appear and Show Cause, requesting the court to issue an order directing respondent, Gregory Anthony Santarelli, to appear to show cause why he should not be found in contempt of this court. Upon consideration thereof,

IT IS ORDERED by this court, effective February 3, 1997, that the motion be, and is, hereby granted to the extent that respondent show cause by filing a written response with the Clerk of this court on or before twenty days from the date of this order why he should not be found in contempt.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED, sua sponte, that all documents filed with this court in this case shall meet the filing requirements set forth in the Rules of Practice of the. Supreme Court of Ohio, including requirements as to form, number, and timeliness of filings.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED, sua sponte, that service be deemed made on respondent by sending this order, and all other orders in this case, by certified mail to the most recent address respondent has given to the Attorney Registration Office.

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

On December 31, 1996, movant, Disciplinary Counsel, filed a Motion for Order to Appear and Show Cause, requesting the court to issue an order directing respondent, Gregory Anthony Santarelli, to appear to show cause why he should not be found in contempt of this court. Upon consideration thereof,

IT IS ORDERED by this court, effective February 3, 1997, that the motion be, and is, hereby granted to the extent that respondent show cause by filing a written response with the Clerk of this court on or before twenty days from the date of this order why he should not be found in contempt.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED, sua sponte, that all documents filed with this court in this case shall meet the filing requirements set forth in the Rules of Practice of the. Supreme Court of Ohio, including requirements as to form, number, and timeliness of filings.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED, sua sponte, that service be deemed made on respondent by sending this order, and all other orders in this case, by certified mail to the most recent address respondent has given to the Attorney Registration Office.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

675 N.E.2d 1246, 78 Ohio St. 3d 1406, 1997 Ohio LEXIS 3848, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/disciplinary-counsel-v-santarelli-ohio-1997.