Opinion

Disciplinary Counsel v. Curry

  • 112 Ohio St. 3d 130
  • 858 N.E.2d 392
  • 2006 Ohio 6517
Court
Ohio Supreme Court
Filed
Dec 27, 2006
Status
Published
Author
Stratton
On the bench
Moyer, Resnick, Pfeifer, O'Connor, O'Donnell, Stratton, Lanzinger
Cited by
4 cases
Authority
More cited than 11.5%

suspending respondent without credit for his interim suspension for being in default of a child-support order

How later courts described this case

  • suspending respondent without credit for his interim suspension for being in default of a child-support order

Written by the judges who cited it.

The opinion

Lundberg Stratton, J.,

dissenting.

{¶ 24} For the reasons stated in my dissenting opinion in Disciplinary Counsel v. Geer, 112 Ohio St.3d 124 , 2006-0hio-6516, 858 N.E.2d 388 , I dissent and would leave respondent’s sanction as an interim suspension, rather than a finite suspension. As soon as respondent becomes current on his arrearage and current on his child-support obligations, I would allow him to provide proof of doing so and permit him to apply to be reinstated on the condition that he proves compliance with all the requirements imposed in this court’s interim suspension order. In so doing, respondent would be able to more quickly return to the practice of law and be able to earn a living and better provide for his children. I respectfully dissent.

Lanzinger, 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.