Office of Disciplinary Counsel v. Ferreri
Ohio Supreme Court
1Per curiam
We adopt the findings and conclusions of the board. Canon 2 of the Code of Judicial Conduct requires that a judge respect and comply with the law and act at all times in a manner that promotes public confidence in the integrity and impartiality of the judiciary. Shortly after one of his decisions was reversed, respondent invited a television reporter into his home and gave an interview in which he maligned the court of appeals, saying that its ruling was “political,” that it was made and written by a law clerk, that the appellate court was influenced by the wife of one of the appellant’s…
2Cited by18 opinions
- Disciplinary Counsel v. ElumOhio Supreme Court · 2012
- Office of Disciplinary Counsel v. HoagueOhio Supreme Court · 2000
- Disciplinary Counsel v. GaulOhio Supreme Court · 2010
- In Re Honorable LamdinCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 2008
- Disciplinary Counsel v. SquireOhio Supreme Court · 2007
13 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.