Opinion

Akron Bar Ass'n v. Paulson

  • 112 Ohio St. 3d 334
  • 859 N.E.2d 932
Court
Ohio Supreme Court
Filed
Dec 26, 2006
Status
Published
Author
Donnell
On the bench
Connor, Donnell, Lanzinger, Moyer, Pfeifer, Resnick, Stratton
Cited by
6 cases

The opinion

O’Donnell, J.,

concurring in part and dissenting in part.

{¶ 18} While I agree with the majority with respect to its findings regarding respondent’s violations of DR 6-101(A)(3) and 7-101(A)(2) and Gov.Bar R. V(4), I do not agree with the sanction imposed.

{¶ 19} As noted in the majority opinion, respondent’s license to practice has been under suspension since December 2, 2005; in this case, he failed to cooperate with the disciplinary process, harmed his clients, and failed to pay restitution. I would therefore impose an indefinite suspension.

O’Connor, J., concurs in the foregoing opinion.

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.