Legal Opinion

Office of Disciplinary Counsel v. Ewing

Ohio Supreme Court

Decided September 30, 1998No. 98-715PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Per curiam

We adopt the findings and conclusions of the board. Orders entered both by the common pleas court and the bankruptcy court specifically prohibited respondent from disbursing legal fees to himself from the trust funds. The order of August 29, 1991 as modified on October 16, 1991 provided that the company would not transfer assets without order of the common pleas court. In entering his 1992 order appointing respondent as counsel in the Chapter 11 case, the bankruptcy judge specifically deleted a paragraph which would have allowed respondent to compensate himself without prior court approval.…

2Cited by3 opinions

  1. Ewing v. O'BrienCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 2004
  2. Ohio State Bar Ass'n v. McCrayOhio Supreme Court · 2006
  3. Disciplinary Counsel v. EwingOhio Supreme Court · 1998

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

Powered by the Exa API