Legal Opinion

Disciplinary Counsel v. Doan

Ohio Supreme Court

Decided January 15, 1997No. 1996-1297PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

[This opinion has been published in Ohio Official Reports at 77 Ohio St.3d 236.] OFFICE OF DISCIPLINARY COUNSEL v. DOAN. [Cite as Disciplinary Counsel v. Doan,

1997-Ohio-299.] Attorneys at law—Kentucky attorney not registered in Ohio preparing and signing deeds in Ohio as “attorney at law” and notarizing documents indicating that notary “commission has no expiration date” is engaged in the unauthorized practice of law. (No. 96-1297--Submitted September 10, 1996--Decided January 15, 1997. ON CERTIFIED REPORT by the Board of Commissioners on the Unauthorized Practice of Law of the Supreme Court,…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Land Title Abstract & Trust Co. v. DworkenOhio Supreme Court · 1934
  2. Office of Disciplinary Counsel v. DoanOhio Supreme Court · 1997

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Toledo Bar Assn. v. Chelsea Title Agency of Dayton, Inc.Ohio Supreme Court · 2003
  2. Lorain Cty. Bar Assn. v. KennedyOhio Supreme Court · 2002
  3. Geauga Cty. Bar Assn. v. CanfieldOhio Supreme Court · 2001

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

Powered by the Exa API