Legal Opinion

Office of Disciplinary Counsel v. Connaughton

Ohio Supreme Court

Decided June 26, 1996No. 96-131PublishedCited by 20 opinions

1Per curiam

We adopt the findings and conclusions of law of the board but disagree with its recommendation. We have consistently held that misappropriation of client funds is an egregious violation of a lawyer’s ethical responsibilities and an appropriate sanction for such breach of trust is disbarment. Greater Cleveland Bar Assn. v. McGarry (1979), 60 Ohio St.2d 168, 14 O.O.3d 406, 398 N.E.2d 560; Lake Cty. Bar Assn. v. Ostrander (1975), 41 Ohio St.2d 93, 70 O.O.2d 173, 322 N.E.2d 653; Ohio State Bar Assn. v. Weaver (1975), 41 Ohio St.2d 97, 70 O.O.2d 175, 322 N.E.2d 665; Mahoning Cty. Bar Assn. v.…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Ohio State Bar Ass'n v. WeaverOhio Supreme Court · 1975
  2. Lake County Bar Ass'n v. OstranderOhio Supreme Court · 1975
  3. Bar Ass'n of Greater Cleveland v. McGarryOhio Supreme Court · 1979
  4. Mahoning County Bar Ass'n v. AlexanderOhio Supreme Court · 1970

3Cited by20 opinions

  1. Cleveland Bar Assn. v. DixonOhio Supreme Court · 2002
  2. Office of Disciplinary Counsel v. GallagherOhio Supreme Court · 1998
  3. Columbus Bar Ass'n v. SternerOhio Supreme Court · 1996
  4. Toledo Bar Ass'n v. BattOhio Supreme Court · 1997
  5. Cleveland Bar Assn. v. HarrisOhio Supreme Court · 2002

15 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