Legal Opinion

Cincinnati Bar Ass'n v. Wolosin

Ohio Supreme Court

Decided January 20, 1999No. 98-1742PublishedCited by 6 opinions

1Per curiam

We adopt the findings, conclusions, and recommendation of the board. Absent any mitigating circumstances, appropriation of client funds and a pattern of neglecting client interests warrant disbarment. Cleveland Bar Assn. v. Armon (1997), 78 Ohio St.3d 497, 499-500, 678 N.E.2d 1371, 1373. Given the number of these incidents, the lack of any mitigating evidence, as well as respondent’s failure to comply with our suspension order and cooperate in the disciplinary investigation, disbarment is the only appropriate sanction here. Respondent is hereby permanently disbarred from the practice of law…

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. Cleveland Bar Ass'n v. ArmonOhio Supreme Court · 1997

3Cited by6 opinions

  1. Columbus Bar Ass'n v. FosterOhio Supreme Court · 2001
  2. Cincinnati Bar Ass'n v. ReisOhio Supreme Court · 1999
  3. Columbus Bar Assn. v. FosterOhio Supreme Court · 2001
  4. Office of Disciplinary Counsel v. RyanOhio Supreme Court · 2000
  5. Cincinnati Bar Assn. v. ReisOhio Supreme Court · 1999

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