Toledo Bar Ass'n v. Pommeranz

649 N.E.2d 179, 72 Ohio St. 3d 274
Ohio Supreme Court·Decided May 31, 1995·No. No. 94-2666·Published·Cited by 4 cases

Opinions

Per Curiam.

We have reviewed the record and concur in the board’s findings of misconduct and its recommendation. Respondent is therefore suspended from the practice of law in Ohio for a period of one year, but this sanction is suspended on the condition that he successfully completes a year of probation to be monitored by Jude T. Aubry. Costs taxed to respondent.

Judgment accordingly.

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

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

Toledo Bar Ass'n v. Pommeranz, 649 N.E.2d 179, 72 Ohio St. 3d 274 (Ohio 1995).

649 N.E.2d 179 (Toledo Bar Ass'n v. Pommeranz) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Toledo Bar Ass'n v. Pommeranz
102 Ohio St. 3d 26 (Ohio Supreme Court, 2004)
Disciplinary Counsel v. Greene
1995 Ohio 97 (Ohio Supreme Court, 1995)
Office of Disciplinary Counsel v. Greene
655 N.E.2d 1299 (Ohio Supreme Court, 1995)