Office of Disciplinary Counsel v. Furtado

641 N.E.2d 184, 71 Ohio St. 3d 20, 1994 Ohio LEXIS 2587
Ohio Supreme Court·Decided November 23, 1994·No. No. 94-536·Published·Cited by 3 cases

Opinion

Per Curiam.

We concur in the findings and recommendations of the board. Respondent is hereby suspended from the practice of law in Ohio for two years with credit given for time served. As a condition to reinstatement, respondent must complete her federal probation. Costs taxed to respondent.

Judgment accordingly.

Moyer, C.J., A.W. Sweeney, Douglas, Resnick, F.E. Sweeney and Pfeifer, JJ., concur. Wright, J., would also condition respondent’s reinstatement upon her full payment of restitution.

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

Office of Disciplinary Counsel v. Furtado, 641 N.E.2d 184, 71 Ohio St. 3d 20, 1994 Ohio LEXIS 2587 (Ohio 1994).

641 N.E.2d 184 (Office of Disciplinary Counsel v. Furtado) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Disciplinary Counsel v. Furtado.
2017 Ohio 9109 (Ohio Supreme Court, 2017)