Office of Disciplinary Counsel v. Baker
This text of 624 N.E.2d 1059 (Office of Disciplinary Counsel v. Baker) 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.
Opinion
On Application for Reinstatement.
This cause came on for further consideration upon the filing of an application for reinstatement by respondent, John M. Baker, Attorney Registration No. 0017471, last known business address in Cleveland, Ohio.
The court coming now to consider its order of December 14, 1992, suspending respondent, John M. Baker, from the practice’ of law in Ohio for a period of one year pursuant to Gov.Bar R. V (6)(B)(3), finds that respondent has substantially complied with that order and with the provisions of Gov.Bar R. V(10)(A). Therefore,
IT IS ORDERED by the court that John M. Baker be, and hereby is, reinstated to the practice of law in the state of Ohio.
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).
[1208]*1208For earlier case, see Disciplinary Counsel v. Baker (1992), 65 Ohio St.3d 302, 603 N.E.2d 990.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
624 N.E.2d 1059, 68 Ohio St. 3d 1207, 1993 Ohio LEXIS 2696, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/office-of-disciplinary-counsel-v-baker-ohio-1993.