Office of Disciplinary Counsel v. Nentwick
This text of 705 N.E.2d 668 (Office of Disciplinary Counsel v. Nentwick) 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
We adopt the findings of the board and its conclusions, except the conclusion that in the MacKall matter respondent violated DR 7-102(A)(2) (knowingly advancing a claim or defense unwarranted under existing law), which the board erroneously characterized as “failing to carry out a contract of employment.” We also adopt the recommendation of the board. Respondent is hereby permanently disbarred from the practice of law in Ohio. Costs are taxed to respondent.
Judgment accordingly.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
705 N.E.2d 668, 84 Ohio St. 3d 491, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/office-of-disciplinary-counsel-v-nentwick-ohio-1999.