Office of Disciplinary Counsel v. Woods

Ohio Supreme Court

Office of Disciplinary Counsel v. Woods

503 N.E.2d 746, 28 Ohio St. 3d 245, 28 Ohio B. 325, 1986 Ohio LEXIS 828

CourtOhio Supreme Court

DecidedDecember 24, 1986

DocketD.D. No. 86-23

StatusPublished

Cited by3 cases

This text of 503 N.E.2d 746 (Office of Disciplinary Counsel v. Woods) 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. Woods, 503 N.E.2d 746, 28 Ohio St. 3d 245, 28 Ohio B. 325, 1986 Ohio LEXIS 828 (Ohio 1986).

Pincite

Opinion

Per Curiam.

Upon a full review of this matter, this court finds that respondent was convicted of theft, forgery and uttering in violation of R.C. 2913.02 and 2913.31. Under Gov. Bar R. V(9)(b), a certified copy of the judgment entry of conviction is conclusive evidence of the commission of these offenses. This court accordingly concurs with the board’s finding that respondent has violated DR 1-102(A)(1), (3), (4) and (6). Wherefore, this court accepts the recommendation of the board and hereby orders that respondent be indefinitely suspended from the practice of law in the state of Ohio. Costs shall be taxed to respondent.

Judgment accordingly.

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

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

Per Curiam.

Upon a full review of this matter, this court finds that respondent was convicted of theft, forgery and uttering in violation of R.C. 2913.02 and 2913.31. Under Gov. Bar R. V(9)(b), a certified copy of the judgment entry of conviction is conclusive evidence of the commission of these offenses. This court accordingly concurs with the board’s finding that respondent has violated DR 1-102(A)(1), (3), (4) and (6). Wherefore, this court accepts the recommendation of the board and hereby orders that respondent be indefinitely suspended from the practice of law in the state of Ohio. Costs shall be taxed to respondent.

Judgment accordingly.

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

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

503 N.E.2d 746, 28 Ohio St. 3d 245, 28 Ohio B. 325, 1986 Ohio LEXIS 828, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/office-of-disciplinary-counsel-v-woods-ohio-1986.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack