Disciplinary Counsel v. Talikka

{¶ 23} I dissent from the majority’s decision to sustain the parties’ objection to the recommended sanction of the Board of Commissioners on Grievances and Discipline and to adopt the parties’ stipulated findings of fact and misconduct. I conclude that the majority’s decision that Talikka should be suspended from the practice of law in Ohio for two years with the second year stayed on the conditions that he (1) commit no further misconduct and (2) pay statutory interest rates prescribed by R.C. 1343.03(A) and 5703.47 to the clients who were victims of his misconduct2 is wholly inadequate when…