Office of Disciplinary Counsel v. Meenen

Ohio Supreme Court

Office of Disciplinary Counsel v. Meenen

725 N.E.2d 626, 88 Ohio St. 3d 268

CourtOhio Supreme Court

DecidedMarch 22, 2000

DocketNo. 99-1399

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 725 N.E.2d 626 (Office of Disciplinary Counsel v. Meenen) 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. Meenen, 725 N.E.2d 626, 88 Ohio St. 3d 268 (Ohio 2000).

Pincite

Opinion

Per Curiam.

When an attorney has been disciplined in another state, Gov. Bar R. V(11)(F)(4)(a)(ii) requires us to impose an identical or comparable discipline unless the disciplined attorney shows by clear and convincing evidence that “the misconduct established warrants substantially different discipline in Ohio.” Disciplinary Counsel v. Hine (1997), 80 Ohio St.3d 448, 449, 687 N.E.2d 420, 421. Respondent has not done so. “New Jersey disbarment is final.” In the Matter of Valentin (1997), 147 N.J. 499, 505, 688 A.2d 602, 605. Therefore, respondent is disbarred from the practice of law in Ohio. Costs taxed to respondent.

Judgment accordingly.

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

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

Per Curiam.

When an attorney has been disciplined in another state, Gov. Bar R. V(11)(F)(4)(a)(ii) requires us to impose an identical or comparable discipline unless the disciplined attorney shows by clear and convincing evidence that “the misconduct established warrants substantially different discipline in Ohio.” Disciplinary Counsel v. Hine (1997), 80 Ohio St.3d 448, 449, 687 N.E.2d 420, 421. Respondent has not done so. “New Jersey disbarment is final.” In the Matter of Valentin (1997), 147 N.J. 499, 505, 688 A.2d 602, 605. Therefore, respondent is disbarred from the practice of law in Ohio. Costs taxed to respondent.

Judgment accordingly.

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

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

725 N.E.2d 626, 88 Ohio St. 3d 268, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/office-of-disciplinary-counsel-v-meenen-ohio-2000.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack