Legal Opinion

DISCIPLINARY COUNSEL v. HOLMES and Kerr.

Ohio Supreme Court

Decided October 25, 2018No. 2018-0818PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Per curiam

*261 {¶ 1} Respondent Thomas Charles Holmes of Aurora, Ohio, Attorney Registration No. 0073794, was admitted to the practice of law in Ohio in 2001. Respondent Ashleigh Brie Kerr of Aurora, Ohio, Attorney Registration No. 0085992, was admitted to the practice of law in Ohio in 2010.

{¶ 2} In December 2017, relator, disciplinary counsel, charged Holmes and Kerr with violating the professional-conduct rules for improperly disclosing confidential client information. The Board of Professional Conduct considered the case on the parties' consent-to-discipline agreements. See Gov.Bar R. V(16).

{¶ 3} In…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Disciplinary Counsel v. BrickerOhio Supreme Court · 2013
  2. Office of Disciplinary Counsel v. YurichOhio Supreme Court · 1997
  3. Geauga County Bar Ass'n v. PsenickaOhio Supreme Court · 1991
  4. Disciplinary Counsel v. ShaverOhio Supreme Court · 2009
  5. Cleveland Metropolitan Bar Association v. HebenOhio Supreme Court · 2017

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. Columbus Bar Association v. Chodosh.Ohio Supreme Court · 2019
  2. Dayton Bar Assn. v. DalyOhio Supreme Court · 2025

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

Powered by the Exa API