Toledo Bar Ass'n v. Wittenberg

Ohio Supreme Court

Toledo Bar Ass'n v. Wittenberg

573 N.E.2d 641, 60 Ohio St. 3d 94, 1991 Ohio LEXIS 1247

CourtOhio Supreme Court

DecidedJune 5, 1991

DocketNo. 90-2074

StatusPublished

Cited by3 cases

This text of 573 N.E.2d 641 (Toledo Bar Ass'n v. Wittenberg) 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

Toledo Bar Ass'n v. Wittenberg, 573 N.E.2d 641, 60 Ohio St. 3d 94, 1991 Ohio LEXIS 1247 (Ohio 1991).

Pincite

Opinion

Per Curiam.

We concur with the findings of the board; however, we modify the sanction. Respondent is hereby suspended from the practice of law for two years. However, we stay the final eighteen months of the suspension and place respondent on probation for that period, subject to relator’s supervision and monitoring, as set forth in Gov. Bar R. V(23). The terms of probation are that respondent handle criminal affidavits in the Toledo Municipal Court in strict conformity with rules and procedures adopted by that court and that he commit no other violation of the law, the Code of Professional Responsibility, or Rules for the Government of the Bar. Costs taxed to respondent.

Judgment accordingly.

Sweeney, Holmes, Douglas, Wright and Resnick, JJ., concur. Moyer, C.J., and H. Brown, J., dissent and would order a two-year suspension, but would suspend the final year of that period pending respondent’s successful completion of a one-year supervised and monitored probation period.

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

Per Curiam.

We concur with the findings of the board; however, we modify the sanction. Respondent is hereby suspended from the practice of law for two years. However, we stay the final eighteen months of the suspension and place respondent on probation for that period, subject to relator’s supervision and monitoring, as set forth in Gov. Bar R. V(23). The terms of probation are that respondent handle criminal affidavits in the Toledo Municipal Court in strict conformity with rules and procedures adopted by that court and that he commit no other violation of the law, the Code of Professional Responsibility, or Rules for the Government of the Bar. Costs taxed to respondent.

Judgment accordingly.

Sweeney, Holmes, Douglas, Wright and Resnick, JJ., concur. Moyer, C.J., and H. Brown, J., dissent and would order a two-year suspension, but would suspend the final year of that period pending respondent’s successful completion of a one-year supervised and monitored probation period.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

573 N.E.2d 641, 60 Ohio St. 3d 94, 1991 Ohio LEXIS 1247, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/toledo-bar-assn-v-wittenberg-ohio-1991.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack