Office of Disciplinary Counsel v. O'Neill

530 N.E.2d 1317, 39 Ohio St. 3d 337, 1988 Ohio LEXIS 369
Ohio Supreme Court·Decided November 16, 1988·No. No. D.D. 88-13·Published·Cited by 2 cases

Opinion

Per Curiam.

The record substantiates that respondent violated DR 1-102(A)(3) and 1-102(A)(4). Accordingly, we concur in the board’s findings and its recommendation. Respondent is hereby ordered indefinitely suspended from the practice of law in Ohio. Costs taxed to respondent.

Judgment accordingly.

Moyer, C.J., Sweeney, Locher, Holmes, Douglas, Wright and H. Brown, JJ., concur.

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

Office of Disciplinary Counsel v. O'Neill, 530 N.E.2d 1317, 39 Ohio St. 3d 337, 1988 Ohio LEXIS 369 (Ohio 1988).

530 N.E.2d 1317 (Office of Disciplinary Counsel v. O'Neill) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Akron Bar Ass'n v. Chandler
584 N.E.2d 677 (Ohio Supreme Court, 1992)
Office of Disciplinary Counsel v. O'Neill
546 N.E.2d 205 (Ohio Supreme Court, 1989)