Office of Disciplinary Counsel v. Lash
This text of 625 N.E.2d 617 (Office of Disciplinary Counsel v. Lash) 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.
Opinion
On Application for Reinstatement.
This cause came on for further consideration upon the filing of an application for reinstatement by respondent, David Lindsay Lash, Attorney Registration No. 0031571, last known business address in Beachwood, Ohio.
The court coming now to consider its order of December 8, 1993, suspending respondent, David Lindsay Lash, from the practice of law in Ohio for a period of one year, with the suspension to have begun on February 19, 1992, pursuant to [1214]*1214Gov.Bar R. V(6)(B)(3), finds that respondent has substantially complied with that order and with the provisions of Gov.Bar R. V(10)(A). Therefore,
IT IS ORDERED by the court that David Lindsay Lash be, and hereby is, reinstated to the practice of law in the state of Ohio.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Clerk of this court issue certified copies of this order as provided for in Gov.Bar R. V(8)(D)(1).
For earlier case, see Disciplinary Counsel v. Lash (1993), 68 Ohio St.3d 12, 623 N.E.2d 28.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
625 N.E.2d 617, 68 Ohio St. 3d 1213, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/office-of-disciplinary-counsel-v-lash-ohio-1994.