Opinion

Columbus Bar Ass'n v. King

84 Ohio St. 3d 174 · Ohio Supreme Court · Dec 9, 1998

Full text

Columbus Bar Association v. King Columbus Bar Association v. Pope

Opinions in this case

Per Curiam. We have reviewed the record and adopt the findings and conclusions of the board. However, we disagree with the board’s recommenda [177] tions. We suspend King for one-year and stay the suspension on condition that, during the probation period, he work with a mentor appointed by relator. We suspend Pope for six months and stay the suspension. Costs taxed to respondents. Judgment accordingly. Douglas, Resnick, F.E. Sweeney and Pfeifer, JJ., concur. Lundberg Stratton, J., concurs as to Pope but dissents as to King and joins the Chief Justice’s dissent only as to King. Moyer, C.J., and Cook, J., dissent.

Disciplinary Counsel v. Brockler

Ohio Supreme Court · Feb 25, 2016

Cincinnati Bar Assn. v. Statzer

Ohio Supreme Court · Dec 31, 2003

Columbus Bar Ass'n v. King

Ohio Supreme Court · Apr 24, 2002

Parentheticals

finding that two attorneys engaged in dishonest conduct by conspiring for one of them to place a phone call while posing as someone else in order to generate evidence in furtherance of a client’s case
Disciplinary Counsel v. Brockler
finding that two attorneys engaged in dishonest conduct by conspiring for one of them to place a phone call while posing as someone else in order to generate evidence in furtherance of a 5 SUPREME COURT OF OHIO client’s case
Disciplinary Counsel v. Brockler