Office of Disciplinary Counsel v. Linick

Ohio Supreme Court

Office of Disciplinary Counsel v. Linick

705 N.E.2d 667, 84 Ohio St. 3d 489

CourtOhio Supreme Court

DecidedFebruary 10, 1999

DocketNo. 98-1241

StatusPublished

Cited by4 cases

This text of 705 N.E.2d 667 (Office of Disciplinary Counsel v. Linick) 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. Linick, 705 N.E.2d 667, 84 Ohio St. 3d 489 (Ohio 1999).

Pincite

Opinions

Per Curiam.

We adopt the findings and conclusions of the board. On review of the record, we find that respondent’s conduct violated DR 2-107(A)(l) and 5-107(A)(2) as found by the board. In Ohio State Bar Assn. v. Zuckerman (1998), 83 Ohio St.3d 148, 699 N.E.2d 40, we imposed a one-year suspension on one of the outside counsel who participated in this scheme. We believe that the same sanction is appropriate for respondent. Respondent is hereby suspended from the practice of law in Ohio for one year. Costs taxed to respondent.

Judgment accordingly.

Moyer, C.J., Douglas, F.E. Sweeney, Pfeifer and Cook, JJ., concur, Resnick and Lundberg Stratton, JJ., dissent.

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

Per Curiam.

We adopt the findings and conclusions of the board. On review of the record, we find that respondent’s conduct violated DR 2-107(A)(l) and 5-107(A)(2) as found by the board. In Ohio State Bar Assn. v. Zuckerman (1998), 83 Ohio St.3d 148, 699 N.E.2d 40, we imposed a one-year suspension on one of the outside counsel who participated in this scheme. We believe that the same sanction is appropriate for respondent. Respondent is hereby suspended from the practice of law in Ohio for one year. Costs taxed to respondent.

Judgment accordingly.

Moyer, C.J., Douglas, F.E. Sweeney, Pfeifer and Cook, JJ., concur, Resnick and Lundberg Stratton, JJ., dissent.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

705 N.E.2d 667, 84 Ohio St. 3d 489, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/office-of-disciplinary-counsel-v-linick-ohio-1999.

Opinions

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack