Legal Opinion · Dissent

Smith v. Conley

Ohio Supreme Court

Decided May 10, 2006No. 2005-0247Published

1DissentLundberg Stratton, J.

{¶ 14} I respectfully dissent. I do not agree that Stark County Court of Common Pleas Loc.R. 17.05(D) is merely “administrative in nature” or that an attorney-client relationship can be considered terminated when the attorney has not complied with the rule’s express requirements for withdrawal from representation. In circumstances in which a local court rule dictates how and when an attorney may withdraw from a case, the client should be entitled to rely on continued representation if those conditions have not been met. I believe that the local rule establishes a bright line that clearly…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Meyers v. First Natl. Bank of CincinnatiOhio Court of Appeals · 1981
  2. Vorisek v. Village of North RandallOhio Supreme Court · 1980
  3. Cuyahoga County Bar Ass'n v. BallouOhio Supreme Court · 2006
  4. Richardson Brothers, Inc. v. Dave's Towing ServiceOhio Court of Appeals · 1983

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

Powered by the Exa API