Office of Disciplinary Counsel v. Acker

583 N.E.2d 1305, 62 Ohio St. 3d 415, 1992 Ohio LEXIS 134
Ohio Supreme Court·Decided February 5, 1992·No. No. 91-1490·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

Per Curiam.

Respondent’s resignation was disciplinary in nature. We hereby indefinitely suspend respondent from December 11, 1990, until he is reinstated to the practice of law in the state of Maine. Costs taxed to respondent.

Judgment accordingly.

Moyer, C.J., Sweeney, Holmes, Douglas, Wright, H. Brown and Resnick, JJ., concur.

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

Office of Disciplinary Counsel v. Acker, 583 N.E.2d 1305, 62 Ohio St. 3d 415, 1992 Ohio LEXIS 134 (Ohio 1992).

583 N.E.2d 1305 (Office of Disciplinary Counsel v. Acker) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

In re Ngobeni
901 N.E.2d 113 (Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, 2009)