Legal Opinion

Office of Disciplinary Counsel v. McCrae

Ohio Supreme Court

Decided May 29, 1996No. 95-2555PublishedCited by 6 opinions

1Per curiam

Upon review of the record, we concur with the board’s findings of fact, conclusions of law and recommendation. McCrae has repeatedly both in private and professional affairs ignored his responsibilities as an attorney. He has lied to banks about his personal financial affairs and he has lied under oath to a federal bankruptcy court.

The Ethical Considerations adopted as part of our Code of Professional Conduct state that a lawyer “should refrain from all illegal and morally reprehensible conduct. Because of his position in society, even minor violations of law by a lawyer may tend to lessen…

2Cited by6 opinions

  1. Office of Disciplinary Counsel v. TrumboOhio Supreme Court · 1996
  2. Disciplinary Counsel v. TrumboOhio Supreme Court · 1996
  3. Columbus Bar Ass'n v. LinnenOhio Supreme Court · 2006
  4. Office of Disciplinary Counsel v. PansieraOhio Supreme Court · 1997
  5. Disciplinary Counsel v. PansieraOhio Supreme Court · 1997

1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

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

Powered by the Exa API