# Office of Disciplinary Counsel v. Jackson

> Ohio Supreme Court · July 7, 1999 · 86 Ohio St. 3d 104

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/6779959

## Case

- **Full name:** Office of Disciplinary Counsel v. Jackson
- **Court:** Ohio Supreme Court
- **Decided:** July 7, 1999
- **Citations:** 86 Ohio St. 3d 104
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Opinion of the court
- **Judges:** Cook, Douglas, Moyer, Pfeifer, Resnick, Stratton, Sweeney
- **Cited by:** 2 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/6779959

## Opinion text

Per Curiam.
We adopt the findings of the board. Because the parties stipulated to the violations, we also adopt the conclusion of the board that respondent violated DR 3-101(B) and Gov.Bar R. V(8)(E) and VI(6)(B), despite the fact that respondent was not charged with the violation of these rules in the disciplinary complaint with respect to his Pike County representation. We deem that respondent’s review of and consent to the stipulated facts and the stipulated violations, and his agreed waiver of a hearing, satisfied the due process requirements of In re Ruffalo (1968), 390 U.S. 544, 550-551 , 88 S.Ct. 1222, 1226 , 20 L.Ed.2d 117, 122-123 , as to these findings and conclusions. We also adopt the *106 recommendation of the board. Respondent is hereby indefinitely suspended from the practice of law in Ohio. Costs are taxed to respondent.
Judgment accordingly.
Moyer, C.J., Douglas, Resnick, F.E. Sweeney, Pfeifer and Cook, JJ., concur.
Lundberg Stratton, J., dissents.

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/6779959. Public record. Not legal advice.