Home/Ohio Supreme Court/Office of Disciplinary Counsel v. Camera

Office of Disciplinary Counsel v. Camera

68 Ohio St. 3d 478, 1994 WL 73657
CourtOhio Supreme Court
DecidedMarch 23, 1994
DocketNo. 93-2180
StatusPublished
Cited by3 cases

This text of 68 Ohio St. 3d 478 (Office of Disciplinary Counsel v. Camera) 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
Office of Disciplinary Counsel v. Camera, 68 Ohio St. 3d 478, 1994 WL 73657 (Ohio 1994).

Opinion

Per Curiam.

We adopt the findings of fact' and conclusions of law of the board. However, we indefinitely suspend respondent from the practice of law without credit for time served. Costs taxed to respondent.

Judgment accordingly.

Moyer, C.J., A.W. Sweeney, Wright, Resnick, F.E. Sweeney and Pfeifer, JJ., concur. Douglas, J., dissents., Douglas, J., dissenting.

I respectfully dissent. I would concur with the recommendations of the board.

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

Related

Disciplinary Counsel v. Pappas
2014 Ohio 3676 (Ohio Supreme Court, 2014)
Office of Disciplinary Counsel v. Camera
678 N.E.2d 1221 (Ohio Supreme Court, 1997)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
68 Ohio St. 3d 478, 1994 WL 73657, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/office-of-disciplinary-counsel-v-camera-ohio-1994.