In re Enforcement of Subpoena Duces Tecum Directed to Custodian of Records, Wallaby's, Inc.

Ohio Supreme Court

In re Enforcement of Subpoena Duces Tecum Directed to Custodian of Records, Wallaby's, Inc.

705 N.E.2d 1237, 84 Ohio St. 3d 1495, 1999 Ohio LEXIS 421

CourtOhio Supreme Court

DecidedFebruary 12, 1999

Docket98-2207

StatusPublished

This text of 705 N.E.2d 1237 (In re Enforcement of Subpoena Duces Tecum Directed to Custodian of Records, Wallaby's, Inc.) 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

In re Enforcement of Subpoena Duces Tecum Directed to Custodian of Records, Wallaby's, Inc., 705 N.E.2d 1237, 84 Ohio St. 3d 1495, 1999 Ohio LEXIS 421 (Ohio 1999).

Pincite

Opinion

On October 21,1998, movant, Ohio State Bar Association, filed a motion requesting this court to order the Custodian of Records of Wallaby’s, Inc. to appear before the court to show cause why that person and Wallaby’s, Inc. failed to obey subpoenas duces tecum issued by the Board of Commissioners on Grievances and Discipline. On November 23, 1998, movant filed notice of the action that respondent had taken to purge itself of contempt. On December 16,1998, this court ordered that the movant be awarded all costs and fees, including reasonable attorney fees, that the movant incurred in prosecuting this enforcement proceeding. On December 28, 1998, respondent filed a motion to vacate this court’s December 16,1998 order. Upon consideration thereof,

IT IS ORDERED by the court that the motion to vacate the court’s December 16, 1998 order be, and is, hereby, granted.

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.

Moyer, C.J., F.E. Sweeney and Cook, JJ., dissent.

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

On October 21,1998, movant, Ohio State Bar Association, filed a motion requesting this court to order the Custodian of Records of Wallaby’s, Inc. to appear before the court to show cause why that person and Wallaby’s, Inc. failed to obey subpoenas duces tecum issued by the Board of Commissioners on Grievances and Discipline. On November 23, 1998, movant filed notice of the action that respondent had taken to purge itself of contempt. On December 16,1998, this court ordered that the movant be awarded all costs and fees, including reasonable attorney fees, that the movant incurred in prosecuting this enforcement proceeding. On December 28, 1998, respondent filed a motion to vacate this court’s December 16,1998 order. Upon consideration thereof,

IT IS ORDERED by the court that the motion to vacate the court’s December 16, 1998 order be, and is, hereby, granted.

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.

Moyer, C.J., F.E. Sweeney and Cook, JJ., dissent.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

705 N.E.2d 1237, 84 Ohio St. 3d 1495, 1999 Ohio LEXIS 421, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-enforcement-of-subpoena-duces-tecum-directed-to-custodian-of-records-ohio-1999.