Office of Disciplinary Counsel v. Dodge

556 N.E.2d 1147, 52 Ohio St. 3d 132, 1990 Ohio LEXIS 276
Ohio Supreme Court·Decided June 27, 1990·No. No. 89-2212·Published·Cited by 2 cases

Opinions

Per Curiam.

Having thoroughly reviewed the instant record, we agree that respondent violated the Disciplinary Rules as found by the board and that this requires a severe sanction. However, because we believe it is unlikely that respondent will repeat his misconduct, we find an indefinite suspension inappropriate. Accordingly, we order that respondent be suspended from the practice of law in Ohio for a period of two years. Costs taxed to respondent.

Judgment accordingly.

Moyer, C.J., Sweeney, Douglas, Wright, H. Brown and Grey, JJ., concur. Holmes, J., dissents. Lawrence Grey, J., of the Fourth Appellate District, sitting for Resnick, J.

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

Office of Disciplinary Counsel v. Dodge, 556 N.E.2d 1147, 52 Ohio St. 3d 132, 1990 Ohio LEXIS 276 (Ohio 1990).

556 N.E.2d 1147 (Office of Disciplinary Counsel v. Dodge) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Hayes v. State Medical Board of Ohio
742 N.E.2d 238 (Ohio Court of Appeals, 2000)
Office of Disciplinary Counsel v. Dodge
597 N.E.2d 164 (Ohio Supreme Court, 1992)