Legal Opinion

Ohio State Bar Ass'n v. Reid

Ohio Supreme Court

Decided April 7, 1999No. 98-1727PublishedCited by 65 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Francis E. Sweeney, Sr., J.

In disciplinary cases, the Supreme Court renders the final determination of the facts and conclusions of law. Therefore, in assessing the propriety of the conduct in question and the appropriate sanction, if any, the Supreme Court is not bound by the board’s findings of fact or conclusions of law. In re Complaint Against Harper (1996), 77 Ohio St.3d 211, 215-216, 673 N.E.2d 1253, 1258, and Cincinnati Bar Assn. v. Heitzler (1972), 32 Ohio St.2d 214, 220, 61 O.O.2d 451, 454, 291 N.E.2d 477, 482. Applying this standard, we have considered the board’s findings of fact…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. In re Complaint Against Judge HarperOhio Supreme Court · 1996
  2. Office of Disciplinary Counsel v. GallagherOhio Supreme Court · 1998
  3. Cincinnati Bar Ass'n v. HeitzlerOhio Supreme Court · 1972
  4. Disciplinary Counsel v. JacksonOhio Supreme Court · 1998
  5. Office of Disciplinary Counsel v. CapersOhio Supreme Court · 1984

3Cited by65 opinions

  1. Cincinnati Bar Assn. v. StatzerOhio Supreme Court · 2003
  2. Cleveland Bar Ass'n v. GlatkiOhio Supreme Court · 2000
  3. Cleveland Bar Ass'n v. ClearyOhio Supreme Court · 2001
  4. Cleveland Bar Assn. v. GlatkiOhio Supreme Court · 2000
  5. Ohio State Bar Assn. v. ReidOhio Supreme Court · 1999

60 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