Legal Opinion

Toledo Bar Ass'n v. Dzienny

Ohio Supreme Court

Decided July 31, 2002No. 2002-0294PublishedCited by 1 opinion

1Per curiam

{¶ 1} We must decide in this case whether an attorney who prepared inter vivos trusts for a client and named himself as a beneficiary should be suspended indefinitely from the practice of law in Ohio or receive a lesser penalty. The Board of Commissioners on Grievances and Discipline of the Supreme Court (“board”) recommended that respondent, Michael A. Dzienny of Toledo, Ohio, Attorney Registration No. 0037618, receive an indefinite suspension for having violated DR 1-102(A)(6) (engaging in conduct that adversely reflects on an attorney’s fitness to practice law), 5-101(A)(l) (accepting…

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. Toledo Bar Ass'n v. DziennyOhio Supreme Court · 1995

3Cited by1 opinion

  1. Toledo Bar Assn. v. DziennyOhio Supreme Court · 2002

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

Powered by the Exa API