Legal Opinion

Akron Bar Ass'n v. Pringle

Ohio Supreme Court

Decided March 6, 1996No. 95-2557PublishedCited by 1 opinion

1Per curiam

Upon review of the record, we concur with the board’s findings of fact and conclusions of law. However, we find that the respondent’s failure to cooperate with the bar association and the board during the investigation of these matters warrants a more severe sanction. Respondent was on notice that under facts similar to these, neglecting a legal matter entrusted to counsel and failing to cooperate in the ensuing disciplinary investigation, we have previously indefinitely suspended an attorney from the practice of law. Disciplinary Counsel v. Liebold (1990), 53 Ohio St.3d 128, 559 N.E.2d 749.…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Cleveland Bar Ass'n v. AllansonOhio Supreme Court · 1995
  2. Office of Disciplinary Counsel v. LeiboldOhio Supreme Court · 1990
  3. Cuyahoga County Bar Ass'n v. DyckOhio Supreme Court · 1991

3Cited by1 opinion

  1. Akron Bar Assn. v. PringleOhio Supreme Court · 1996

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

Powered by the Exa API