Office of Disciplinary Counsel v. Miller

679 N.E.2d 1098, 79 Ohio St. 3d 115
CourtOhio Supreme Court
DecidedJune 25, 1997
DocketNo. 97-437
StatusPublished
Cited by7 cases

This text of 679 N.E.2d 1098 (Office of Disciplinary Counsel v. Miller) 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. Miller, 679 N.E.2d 1098, 79 Ohio St. 3d 115 (Ohio 1997).

Opinion

Per Curiam.

We agree with the findings, conclusions, and recommendation of the board. We hereby suspend respondent from the practice of law for one year with credit for time served since his interim suspension was imposed. Costs are taxed to respondent.

Judgment accordingly.

Douglas, F.E. Sweeney, Pfeifer and Lundberg Stratton, JJ., concur. Moyer, C.J., and Resnick, J., dissent because they would not give respondent credit for time served. Cook, J., not participating.

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

Related

Disciplinary Counsel v. O'Malley
2010 Ohio 3802 (Ohio Supreme Court, 2010)
Disciplinary Counsel v. Margolis
870 N.E.2d 1158 (Ohio Supreme Court, 2007)
Disciplinary Counsel v. Miller
1997 Ohio 68 (Ohio Supreme Court, 1997)
Office of Disciplinary Counsel v. Miller
79 Ohio St. 3d 1233 (Ohio Supreme Court, 1997)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
679 N.E.2d 1098, 79 Ohio St. 3d 115, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/office-of-disciplinary-counsel-v-miller-ohio-1997.