Office of Disciplinary Counsel v. Hock

Ohio Supreme Court

Office of Disciplinary Counsel v. Hock

555 N.E.2d 930, 52 Ohio St. 3d 601, 1990 Ohio LEXIS 308

CourtOhio Supreme Court

DecidedMay 17, 1990

DocketNo. D.D. 87-23

StatusPublished

This text of 555 N.E.2d 930 (Office of Disciplinary Counsel v. Hock) 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. Hock, 555 N.E.2d 930, 52 Ohio St. 3d 601, 1990 Ohio LEXIS 308 (Ohio 1990).

Pincite

Opinion

This cause came on for further consideration upon respondent Jerome Harrison Hock’s filing of an application for reinstatement.

The court coming now to consider its order of April 27, 1988, suspending respondent, Jerome Harrison Hock, from the practice of law for a period of two years pursuant to Gov. Bar R. V(7)(c), finds that respondent has substantially complied with that order and with the provisions of Gov. Bar R. V(24).

Therefore, IT IS ORDERED by the court that Jerome Harrison Hock be, and hereby is, reinstated to the practice of law in the state of Ohio.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that respondent comply -with the registration requirements of Gov. Bar R. VI.

(For earlier case, see [1988], 36 Ohio St. 3d 177, 522 N.E. 2d 543.)

Moyer, C.J., Sweeney, Holmes, Douglas, Wright, H. Brown and Resnick, JJ., concur.

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