Office of Disciplinary Counsel v. Slodov

660 N.E.2d 1164, 74 Ohio St. 3d 618
CourtOhio Supreme Court
DecidedFebruary 28, 1996
DocketNo. 95-2176
StatusPublished
Cited by2 cases

This text of 660 N.E.2d 1164 (Office of Disciplinary Counsel v. Slodov) 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. Slodov, 660 N.E.2d 1164, 74 Ohio St. 3d 618 (Ohio 1996).

Opinion

Per Curiam.

Upon review of the record, we concur in the board’s findings of misconduct and recommended sanction. Respondent is therefore publicly reprimanded for his violations of DR 7-109(B) and 1-102(A)(5) and (6). Costs taxed to respondent.

Judgment accordingly.

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

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

Related

Disciplinary Counsel v. Slodov
1996 Ohio 243 (Ohio Supreme Court, 1996)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
660 N.E.2d 1164, 74 Ohio St. 3d 618, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/office-of-disciplinary-counsel-v-slodov-ohio-1996.