Legal Opinion

Office of Disciplinary Counsel v. Casalinuovo

Ohio Supreme Court

Decided June 16, 1993No. 92-2529PublishedCited by 6 opinions

1Per curiam

Based upon our review of the stipulations and the record, we agree with the findings of fact and conclusions of the board. However, we add to the board’s recommendation an additional condition to probation. Respondent is suspended from the practice of law in Ohio for two years with the entire suspension stayed and respondent placed on probation for a period of two years on condition that throughout the probationary period, he (1) remain drug-free and alcohol free; (2) be subject to random urine analysis and testing for substance and alcohol abuse, to be monitored by the Akron Bar Association,…

2Cited by6 opinions

  1. Office of Disciplinary Counsel v. FortadoOhio Supreme Court · 1996
  2. Disciplinary Counsel v. AultOhio Supreme Court · 2006
  3. Disciplinary Counsel v. MayOhio Supreme Court · 2005
  4. Disciplinary Counsel v. FortadoOhio Supreme Court · 1996
  5. Disciplinary Counsel v. CasalinuovoOhio Supreme Court · 1995

1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

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

Powered by the Exa API