Legal Opinion

Disciplinary Counsel v. Newcomer

Ohio Supreme Court

Decided September 11, 2008No. 2008-0765PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Per curiam

{¶ 1} Respondent, Ned Stevens Newcomer of Holland, Ohio, Attorney Registration No. 0012978, was admitted to the practice of law in Ohio in 1968. The Board of Commissioners on Grievances and Discipline has recommended that we suspend respondent’s license to practice for six months, staying the suspension on condition, based on findings that he commingled his own funds with clients’ funds held in trust. We agree that respondent violated the Code of Professional Responsibility as found by the board and that a six-month stayed suspension is appropriate.

{¶ 2} Relator, Disciplinary Counsel, charged…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Columbus Bar Ass'n v. PedenOhio Supreme Court · 2008
  2. Cuyahoga County Bar Ass'n v. NanceOhio Supreme Court · 2008

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. Disciplinary Counsel v. DoellmanOhio Supreme Court · 2010
  2. Disciplinary Counsel v. JohnstonOhio Supreme Court · 2009
  3. Disciplinary Counsel v. VivyanOhio Supreme Court · 2010
  4. Disciplinary Counsel v. DockryOhio Supreme Court · 2012
  5. Columbus Bar Assn. v. WatsonOhio Supreme Court · 2012

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

Powered by the Exa API