Office of Disciplinary Counsel v. Frease

660 N.E.2d 1156, 74 Ohio St. 3d 607
Ohio Supreme Court·Decided February 28, 1996·No. No. 95-2130·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

Per Curiam.

After reviewing the record, we agree with the board. We adopt its findings of fact and conclusions of law and indefinitely suspend respondent from the practice of law in Ohio. Furthermore, as a condition for reinstatement, respondent must make full restitution to his clients with interest according to the judgment rate. We tax costs to respondent.

Judgment accordingly.

Moyer, C.J., Douglas, Wright, Resnick, F.E. Sweeney and Pfeifer, JJ., concur. Cook, J., dissents and would disbar.

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

Office of Disciplinary Counsel v. Frease, 660 N.E.2d 1156, 74 Ohio St. 3d 607 (Ohio 1996).

660 N.E.2d 1156 (Office of Disciplinary Counsel v. Frease) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Disciplinary Counsel v. Frease
1996 Ohio 122 (Ohio Supreme Court, 1996)