Ohio State Bar Ass'n v. Reid
Ohio Supreme Court
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
- In re Complaint Against Judge HarperOhio Supreme Court · 1996
- Office of Disciplinary Counsel v. GallagherOhio Supreme Court · 1998
- Cincinnati Bar Ass'n v. HeitzlerOhio Supreme Court · 1972
- Disciplinary Counsel v. JacksonOhio Supreme Court · 1998
- Office of Disciplinary Counsel v. CapersOhio Supreme Court · 1984
3Cited by65 opinions
- Cincinnati Bar Assn. v. StatzerOhio Supreme Court · 2003
- Cleveland Bar Ass'n v. GlatkiOhio Supreme Court · 2000
- Cleveland Bar Ass'n v. ClearyOhio Supreme Court · 2001
- Cleveland Bar Assn. v. GlatkiOhio Supreme Court · 2000
- Ohio State Bar Assn. v. ReidOhio Supreme Court · 1999
60 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.