Legal Opinion

Disciplinary Counsel v. Ford

Ohio Supreme Court

Decided September 5, 2012No. 2011-2042PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Per curiam

{¶ 1} Respondent, George Cook Ford III of Norwalk, Ohio, Attorney Registration No. 0011982, was admitted to the practice of law in Ohio in 1977.

{¶ 2} On May 26, 2011, relator, disciplinary counsel, filed a three-count complaint alleging that Ford had neglected one client’s legal matter, failed to provide competent representation to a second client, charged the second client an illegal or clearly excessive fee, failed to reasonably communicate with both clients, and failed to cooperate with the resulting disciplinary investigations, and that this conduct was prejudicial to the administration…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. Stark Cty. Bar Assn. v. ButtacavoliOhio Supreme Court · 2002
  2. Disciplinary Counsel v. BroerenOhio Supreme Court · 2007
  3. Akron Bar Ass'n v. SnyderOhio Supreme Court · 1999
  4. Columbus Bar Ass'n v. TorianOhio Supreme Court · 2005
  5. Akron Bar Assn. v. SnyderOhio Supreme Court · 1999

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

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. Disciplinary Counsel v. Engel.Ohio Supreme Court · 2018
  2. Disciplinary Counsel v. Cheselka (Slip Opinion)Ohio Supreme Court · 2019
  3. Disciplinary Counsel v. DaniellOhio Supreme Court · 2023
  4. Disciplinary Counsel v. FordOhio Supreme Court · 2016
  5. Disciplinary Counsel v. VanBibberOhio Supreme Court · 2026

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

Powered by the Exa API