Legal Opinion

Dayton Bar Ass'n v. Buren

Ohio Supreme Court

Decided December 30, 1998No. 98-1729PublishedCited by 1 opinion

1Per curiam

We concur with the findings, conclusions, and recommendation of the board. Burén engaged in a continuing course of deceit, misrepresentation, and neglect of duty to his clients and the bankruptcy court. In addition, Burén has failed to cooperate with disciplinary proceedings. Under these circumstances, disbarment is the appropriate sanction. See, e.g., Cuyahoga Cty. Bar Assn. v. Churilla (1997), 78 Ohio St.3d 348, 350, 678 N.E.2d 515, 516-517; *274Cincinnati Bar Assn. v. Brown (1997), 78 Ohio St.3d 345, 678 N.E.2d 513. Buren is hereby disbarred from the practice of law in Ohio. Costs taxed to…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Cuyahoga County Bar Ass'n v. ChurillaOhio Supreme Court · 1997
  2. Cincinnati Bar Ass'n v. BrownOhio Supreme Court · 1997

3Cited by1 opinion

  1. Dayton Bar Assn. v. BurenOhio Supreme Court · 1998

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

Powered by the Exa API