Stark County Bar Ass'n v. George

Per Curidm.

Prom án anlaysis of the evidence, this court agrees that the record amply, supports the findings of the board that respondent has violated DR 1-102 (A) (4), (5) and (6), DR 2-107, DR 3-101, DR 3-102, and DR 3-103 of the Code of Professional Responsibility.

The foregoing violations, individually and' collectively,'constitute misconduct as defined in Gov. R. V (5) (a).

We come now to the recommendation of the board that respondent.be indefinitely suspended; from the practice of law.'

We find that respondent’s conduct showed hé was dishonest, fraudulent, deceitful, and that, he…