Opinion

Office of Disciplinary Counsel v. LaCour

  • 91 Ohio St. 3d 154
  • 743 N.E.2d 395
Court
Ohio Supreme Court
Filed
Mar 7, 2001
Status
Published
Author
Stratton
On the bench
Cook, Douglas, Moyer, Pfeifer, Resnick, Stratton, Sweeney
Cited by
2 cases

The opinion

Lundberg Stratton, J.,

dissenting. I respectfully dissent and would, instead, impose a more stringent sanction in this case. Respondent’s conduct and deceitfulness, and the immense harm to his many clients as a result of the dismissal of their case merits a more serious sanction.

I would suspend respondent from the practice of law for a period of twenty-four months with twelve months stayed (to which relator and respondent had originally stipulated). I would require respondent to refund the entire amount of money that he accepted from his clients, not just his fee. His neglect and inaction resulted in dismissal of his clients’ claims. They should not be penalized for his failures and should at least be refunded all the monies they paid to respondent, including reimbursement for expenses incurred.

This is a copy of a public record, reproduced as it was published. It is not legal advice, and it may not be the version a court would rely on. Check the official source before you cite it.

A word about cookies

We need a few to keep you signed in and the library working. The rest help us see which pages people use and where they get stuck. They stay off unless you say yes.