Office of Disciplinary Counsel v. Bowen
Ohio Supreme Court
1Per curiam
Having reviewed the record, we conclude that respondent violated the aforementioned Disciplinary Rules. However, to adopt the board’s recommended sanction, we *324would necessarily be required to deviate substantially from the precedent established by this court.
Respondent’s accomplishments as a practitioner, public servant, and community volunteer have made him a respected member of the bar in this state. However, this court cannot overlook the precedent establishing the sanction for a lawyer’s failure to comply with the federal income tax laws. See, e.g., Toledo Bar Assn. v. Stichter (1985), 17…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Columbus Bar Ass'n v. WolfeOhio Supreme Court · 1982
- Toledo Bar Ass'n v. StichterOhio Supreme Court · 1985
- Ohio State Bar Ass'n v. LohaOhio Supreme Court · 1983
- Bar Ass'n v. LittOhio Supreme Court · 1983
- Cincinnati Bar Ass'n v. MittendorfOhio Supreme Court · 1983
3Cited by8 opinions
- Bryan v. FawkesSupreme Court of The Virgin Islands · 2014
- Toledo Bar Assn. v. AboodOhio Supreme Court · 2004
- Cuyahoga County Bar Ass'n v. LazzaroOhio Supreme Court · 2003
- Cuyahoga County Bar Ass'n v. VenezianoOhio Supreme Court · 2008
- Office of Disciplinary Counsel v. BowenOhio Supreme Court · 1989
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.