Opinion

Disciplinary Counsel v. Brown

  • 127 Ohio St. 3d 1511
  • 940 N.E.2d 562
Court
Ohio Supreme Court
Filed
Jan 25, 2011
Status
Published
On the bench
Brown, Connor, Cupp, Donnell, Lanzinger, Pfeifer, Stratton
Cited by
0 cases

The opinion

This cause came on for further consideration upon the filing by relator, Disciplinary Counsel, of a motion for an order to appear and show cause. Respondent was ordered to appear before this court, and he appeared on January 19, 2011.

Upon consideration thereof, it is ordered by this court that respondent, Bruce A. Brown, a.k.a. B. Andrew Brown, a.k.a. Amir Jamal Tauwab, is found in contempt for use of the terms “Esq.,” “Esquire,” “J.D.,” or “Juris Doctor” in conjunction with his name or his business name in violation of the court’s March 19, 2009 order.

It is further ordered that respondent is held in contempt of this court's order to pay a $50,000 civil penalty in this matter. Respondent is hereby ordered to submit to a debtor’s exam to be conducted by the office of the Ohio Attorney General within 45 days of the date of this order.

O’Connor, C.J., and Lundberg Stratton, O’Donnell, Lanzinger, Cupp, and McGee Brown, JJ., concur.

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.