# Akron Bar Ass'n v. Murty

> Ohio Supreme Court · June 11, 1980 · 62 Ohio St. 2d 301

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/6756891

## Case

- **Full name:** Akron Bar Association v. Murty
- **Court:** Ohio Supreme Court
- **Decided:** June 11, 1980
- **Citations:** 62 Ohio St. 2d 301; 16 Ohio Op. 3d 352; 405 N.E.2d 300; 1980 Ohio LEXIS 743
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Opinion of the court
- **Judges:** Brown, Celebrezze, Herbert, Holmes, Locher, Sweeney
- **Cited by:** 1 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases.
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/6756891

## Opinion text

Per Curiam.
“One of the fundamental tenets of the professional responsibility of a lawyer is that he should maintain a degree of personal and professional integrity that meets the highest standard. The integrity of the profession can be maintained only if the conduct of the individual attorney is above reproach. * * * ” Cleveland Bar Assn. v. Stein (1972), 29 Ohio St. 2d 77, 81 .
Notwithstanding respondent’s contention that violation of DR 1-102(A)(4) amounted to only a minor offense, minus any moral turpitude, the propriety required of respondent by the legal profession, encompassing his overall conduct under these circumstances, was violated.
Therefore, having reviewed the findings of fact and recommendation of the board, as well as the documentation and other evidence presented, it is found that respondent did violate DR 1-102(A)(4).
It is the judgment of this court that respondent receive a public reprimand, and it is so ordered.
Judgment accordingly.
Celebrezze, C. J., Herbert, W. Brown, P. Brown, Sweeney, Locher and Holmes, JJ., concur.

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/6756891. Public record. Not legal advice.