Cincinnati Bar Ass'n v. Walker
Ohio Supreme Court
1Per curiam
This court finds upon a review of the record that respondent violated the aforementioned Disciplinary Rules. Respondent argues *103that a penalty less than a one-year suspension would be an appropriate sanction in view of his age, prior record and sole-practitioner status. We disagree.
In Disciplinary Counsel v. Morton (1983), 5 Ohio St. 3d 206, this court stated at 208:
“* * * There are few ethical breaches which impact more negatively on the integrity of the legal profession than the misuse of a client’s funds. * * *77
In Toledo Bar Assn. v. Gruhler (1985), 16 Ohio St. 3d 5, this court further stated…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Office of Disciplinary Counsel v. MortonOhio Supreme Court · 1983
- Toledo Bar Ass'n v. GruhlerOhio Supreme Court · 1985
- Toledo Bar Ass'n v. PottsOhio Supreme Court · 1984
3Cited by1 opinion
- Columbus Bar Ass'n v. GillOhio Supreme Court · 1988