Legal Opinion

Office of Disciplinary Counsel v. Brown

Ohio Supreme Court

Decided November 13, 1996No. 96-1431PublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Per curiam

We adopt the findings, conclusions, and recommendation of the board. The record indicates that respondent requires rehabilitation. This court’s duty to the public requires that respondent affirmatively demonstrate his rehabilitation before we allow him to resume his place on the rolls of those permitted to practice law in Ohio. We have thus far suspended respondent from the practice of law for an interim period. We now hereby suspend respondent from the practice of law for an indefinite period. Costs taxed to the respondent.

Judgment accordingly.

Moyer, C.J., Douglas, Resnick, F.E. Sweeney,…

2Cited by4 opinions

  1. Disciplinary Counsel v. GallagherOhio Supreme Court · 1998
  2. Disciplinary Counsel v. HiltbrandOhio Supreme Court · 2006
  3. Disciplinary Counsel v. BrownOhio Supreme Court · 1996
  4. Office of Disciplinary Counsel v. GallagherOhio Supreme Court · 1998

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

Powered by the Exa API