Home/Ohio Supreme Court/Office of Disciplinary Counsel v. Williams

Office of Disciplinary Counsel v. Williams

66 Ohio St. 3d 41
CourtOhio Supreme Court
DecidedMarch 3, 1993
DocketNo. 92-2207
StatusPublished
Cited by1 cases

This text of 66 Ohio St. 3d 41 (Office of Disciplinary Counsel v. Williams) 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. Williams, 66 Ohio St. 3d 41 (Ohio 1993).

Opinion

Per Curiam.

We agree that respondent violated DR 1-102(A)(3) and 1-102(A)(4), and further agree that respondent’s unique psychological history is sufficiently mitigating to warrant the sanction of indefinite suspension. Accordingly, we order that respondent be indefinitely suspended from the practice of law in Ohio. Costs taxed to respondent.

Judgment accordingly.

A.W. Sweeney, Douglas, F.E. Sweeney and Pfeifer, JJ., concur. Moyer, C.J., Wright and Resnick, JJ., dissent and would disbar respondent.

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

Related

Disciplinary Counsel v. Williams
1997 Ohio 279 (Ohio Supreme Court, 1997)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
66 Ohio St. 3d 41, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/office-of-disciplinary-counsel-v-williams-ohio-1993.