Office of Disciplinary Counsel v. Stanley

Ohio Supreme Court

Office of Disciplinary Counsel v. Stanley

658 N.E.2d 261, 74 Ohio St. 3d 218

Ohio Supreme Court·Decided January 10, 1996·No. No. 95-1672·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

Per Curiam.

Upon review of the record, we concur in the board’s findings that respondent violated DR 1-102(A)(5), 1-102(A)(6), and 6-101(A)(3), as well as Gov.Bar R. V(9)(D), V(4)(G), and VI. We also agree with the sanction recom[221] mended for this misconduct. Respondent is therefore permanently disbarred from the practice of law in Ohio.

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

Per Curiam.

Upon review of the record, we concur in the board’s findings that respondent violated DR 1-102(A)(5), 1-102(A)(6), and 6-101(A)(3), as well as Gov.Bar R. V(9)(D), V(4)(G), and VI. We also agree with the sanction recom[221] mended for this misconduct. Respondent is therefore permanently disbarred from the practice of law in Ohio.

Judgment accordingly.

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

Office of Disciplinary Counsel v. Stanley, 658 N.E.2d 261, 74 Ohio St. 3d 218 (Ohio 1996).

Pincite

658 N.E.2d 261 (Office of Disciplinary Counsel v. Stanley) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related