Legal Opinion

Cincinnati Bar Ass'n v. White

Ohio Supreme Court

Decided October 1, 1997No. 97-808PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Per curiam

DR 2-103(B) provides that “[a] lawyer shall not compensate or give anything of value to a person or organization to recommend or secure the lawyer’s employment by a client * * The only organizations excepted from this rule are those that can qualify under DR 2-103(D). Such excepted organizations are a legal aid society or a public defender office, a military legal assistance office, a qualified legal referral service, or a bona-fide organization offering a legal services plan that complies with certain conditions. The purpose of DR 2-103 is to ensure that individual lawyers do not avoid the…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Columbus Bar Ass'n v. ThompsonOhio Supreme Court · 1982
  2. Columbus Bar Ass'n v. RobinsonOhio Supreme Court · 1979
  3. Office of Disciplinary Counsel v. HeardOhio Supreme Court · 1985

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. Bruce Comly French v. Bank One, Lima N.A. (In Re Rehab Project, Inc.)United States Bankruptcy Court, N.D. Ohio · 1999
  2. Cincinnati Bar Ass'n v. HaasOhio Supreme Court · 1998
  3. Cincinnati Bar Assn. v. HaasOhio Supreme Court · 1998
  4. Cincinnati Bar Assn. v. WhiteOhio Supreme Court · 1997
  5. Figueroa Morales v. PerezTribunal De Apelaciones De Puerto Rico/Court of Appeals of Puerto Rico · 2001

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

Powered by the Exa API