Legal Opinion

Office of Disciplinary Counsel v. Fowerbaugh

Ohio Supreme Court

Decided December 12, 1995No. 1995-0394PublishedCited by 111 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtMoyer, C.J.

This disciplinary case presents the court with an opportunity to provide guidance to certified grievance committees and the Board of Commissioners on Grievances and Discipline in all cases where an attorney engages in a pattern of conduct of misleading or lying to a client concerning a legal matter entrusted to the lawyer by the client. DR 1-102(A)(4) is straightforward and unambiguous. It states that a “lawyer shall not * * * [e]ngage in conduct involving dishonesty, fraud, deceit, or misrepresentation.”

In discipline cases where an attorney has deceived a client, we have imposed a varying…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Office of Disciplinary Counsel v. GreeneOhio Supreme Court · 1995
  2. Lake County Bar Ass'n v. SperosOhio Supreme Court · 1995
  3. Toledo Bar Ass'n v. DziennyOhio Supreme Court · 1995
  4. Office of Disciplinary Counsel v. GwynOhio Supreme Court · 1994

3Cited by111 opinions

  1. Disciplinary Counsel v. O'NeillOhio Supreme Court · 2004
  2. Disciplinary Counsel v. FowerbaughOhio Supreme Court · 1995
  3. Cincinnati Bar Assn. v. StatzerOhio Supreme Court · 2003
  4. Office of Disciplinary Counsel v. TrumboOhio Supreme Court · 1996
  5. Disciplinary Counsel v. RohrerOhio Supreme Court · 2009

106 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API