Ohio State Bar Assn. v. Zuckerman

Ohio Supreme Court

Ohio State Bar Assn. v. Zuckerman

1999 Ohio 41, 87 Ohio St. 3d 1225

CourtOhio Supreme Court

DecidedOctober 29, 1999

Docket1997-2670

StatusPublished

This text of 1999 Ohio 41 (Ohio State Bar Assn. v. Zuckerman) 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

Ohio State Bar Assn. v. Zuckerman, 1999 Ohio 41, 87 Ohio St. 3d 1225 (Ohio 1999).

Pincite

Opinion

[This opinion has been published in Ohio Official Reports at 87 Ohio St.3d 1225.]

OHIO STATE BAR ASSOCIATION v. ZUCKERMAN. [Cite as Ohio State Bar Assn. v. Zuckerman, 1999-Ohio-41.] (No. 97-2670—Submitted and decided November 8, 1999.) ON APPLICATION FOR REINSTATEMENT. __________________ {¶ 1} This cause came on for further consideration upon the filing of an application for reinstatement by respondent Richard Zuckerman, Attorney Registration No. 0025680, last known business address in Cleveland, Ohio. {¶ 2} The court coming now to consider its order of September 16, 1998, wherein the court, pursuant to Gov.Bar R. V(6)(B)(3), suspended respondent for a period of one year, finds that respondent has substantially complied with that order and with the provisions of Gov.Bar R. V(10)(A). Therefore, {¶ 3} IT IS ORDERED by this court that Richard Zuckerman be and hereby is reinstated to the practice of law in the state of Ohio. {¶ 4} IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Clerk of this court issue certified copies of this order as provided for in Gov.Bar R. V(8)(D)(1), that publication be made as provided for in Gov.Bar R. V(8)(D)(2), and that respondent bear the costs of publication. {¶ 5} For earlier case, see Ohio State Bar Assn. v. Zuckerman (1998), 83 Ohio St.3d 148, 699 N.E.2d 40. MOYER, C.J., DOUGLAS, RESNICK, F.E. SWEENEY, PFEIFER, COOK and LUNDBERG STRATTON, JJ., concur. __________________

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

[This opinion has been published in Ohio Official Reports at 87 Ohio St.3d 1225.]

OHIO STATE BAR ASSOCIATION v. ZUCKERMAN. [Cite as Ohio State Bar Assn. v. Zuckerman, 1999-Ohio-41.] (No. 97-2670—Submitted and decided November 8, 1999.) ON APPLICATION FOR REINSTATEMENT. __________________ {¶ 1} This cause came on for further consideration upon the filing of an application for reinstatement by respondent Richard Zuckerman, Attorney Registration No. 0025680, last known business address in Cleveland, Ohio. {¶ 2} The court coming now to consider its order of September 16, 1998, wherein the court, pursuant to Gov.Bar R. V(6)(B)(3), suspended respondent for a period of one year, finds that respondent has substantially complied with that order and with the provisions of Gov.Bar R. V(10)(A). Therefore, {¶ 3} IT IS ORDERED by this court that Richard Zuckerman be and hereby is reinstated to the practice of law in the state of Ohio. {¶ 4} IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Clerk of this court issue certified copies of this order as provided for in Gov.Bar R. V(8)(D)(1), that publication be made as provided for in Gov.Bar R. V(8)(D)(2), and that respondent bear the costs of publication. {¶ 5} For earlier case, see Ohio State Bar Assn. v. Zuckerman (1998), 83 Ohio St.3d 148, 699 N.E.2d 40. MOYER, C.J., DOUGLAS, RESNICK, F.E. SWEENEY, PFEIFER, COOK and LUNDBERG STRATTON, JJ., concur. __________________

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

1999 Ohio 41, 87 Ohio St. 3d 1225, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/ohio-state-bar-assn-v-zuckerman-ohio-1999.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack