Office of Disciplinary Counsel v. Pagac

Ohio Supreme Court

Office of Disciplinary Counsel v. Pagac

650 N.E.2d 423, 72 Ohio St. 3d 341

CourtOhio Supreme Court

DecidedJune 28, 1995

DocketNo. 94-2701

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 650 N.E.2d 423 (Office of Disciplinary Counsel v. Pagac) 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. Pagac, 650 N.E.2d 423, 72 Ohio St. 3d 341 (Ohio 1995).

Pincite

Opinion

Per Curiam.

Respondent moved to strike the board’s recommendation as being the product of an “illegal discriminatory investigation and prosecution” instituted while he was “court adjudicated mentally incompetent and incapacitated.” Respondent has not substantiated these allegations, and the record before us provides no medical evidence from which this conclusion can be drawn. Rather, we see only the report of a psychiatrist, to whom respondent was referred by relator in 1992, that describes respondent’s prior drug and alcohol addictions as being “in remission” and concludes that “[h]e does not have any [345]*345other mental illness, such as a depressive disorder or affective disorder, anxiety disorder, or psychosis.” The motion to strike is, therefore, overruled.

Respondent’s violations of the cited Disciplinary Rules, on the other hand, are amply supported by the evidence, and we share the board’s anxiety over his attempts at intimidation. We, thus, completely agree with the recommendation to impose our harshest penalty for this misconduct. Respondent is hereby ordered permanently disbarred from the practice of law in Ohio. Costs taxed to respondent.

Judgment accordingly.

Moyer, C.J., Douglas, Resnick, F.E. Sweeney, Pfeifer and Cook, JJ., concur. Wright, J., not participating.

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

Per Curiam.

Respondent moved to strike the board’s recommendation as being the product of an “illegal discriminatory investigation and prosecution” instituted while he was “court adjudicated mentally incompetent and incapacitated.” Respondent has not substantiated these allegations, and the record before us provides no medical evidence from which this conclusion can be drawn. Rather, we see only the report of a psychiatrist, to whom respondent was referred by relator in 1992, that describes respondent’s prior drug and alcohol addictions as being “in remission” and concludes that “[h]e does not have any [345]*345other mental illness, such as a depressive disorder or affective disorder, anxiety disorder, or psychosis.” The motion to strike is, therefore, overruled.

Respondent’s violations of the cited Disciplinary Rules, on the other hand, are amply supported by the evidence, and we share the board’s anxiety over his attempts at intimidation. We, thus, completely agree with the recommendation to impose our harshest penalty for this misconduct. Respondent is hereby ordered permanently disbarred from the practice of law in Ohio. Costs taxed to respondent.

Judgment accordingly.

Moyer, C.J., Douglas, Resnick, F.E. Sweeney, Pfeifer and Cook, JJ., concur. Wright, J., not participating.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

650 N.E.2d 423, 72 Ohio St. 3d 341, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/office-of-disciplinary-counsel-v-pagac-ohio-1995.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack