# Disciplinary Counsel v. Eisenberg

> Ohio Supreme Court · March 25, 1998 · 81 Ohio St. 3d 295

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/6776671

## Case

- **Full name:** Office of Disciplinary Counsel v. Eisenberg
- **Court:** Ohio Supreme Court
- **Decided:** March 25, 1998
- **Citations:** 81 Ohio St. 3d 295; 690 N.E.2d 1282
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Opinion of the court
- **Judges:** Cook, Douglas, Moyer, Pfeifer, Resnick, Stratton, Sweeney
- **Cited by:** 11 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/6776671

## Opinion text

Per Curiam.
After review of the record, we adopt the findings and conclusions of the board. We said in Disciplinary Counsel v. Fowerbaugh (1995), 74 Ohio St.3d 187, 190 , 658 N.E.2d 237 , 240, and recently repeated in Cleveland Bar Assn. v. Knowlton (1998), 81 Ohio St.3d 76 , 689 N.E.2d 538 , and Disciplinary Counsel v. Bandy (1998), 81 Ohio St.3d 291 , 690 N.E.2d 1280 , “[w]hen an attorney engages in a course of conduct resulting in a finding that the attorney has violated DR 1-102(A)(4), the attorney will be actually suspended from the practice of law for an appropriate period of time.” But, as the board found here, respondent’s action was an isolated incident in an otherwise unblemished legal career and not a course of conduct. We therefore adopt the recommendation of the board. Respondent is hereby publicly reprimanded. Costs taxed to respondent.
Judgment accordingly.
Moyer, C.J., Douglas, Resnick, F.E. Sweeney, Pfeifer, Cook and Lundberg Stratton, JJ., concur.

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/6776671. Public record. Not legal advice.