Disciplinary Counsel v. Fumich
Ohio Supreme Court
1DissentMoyer, C.J.
*261{¶ 19} Attorney dishonesty is a serious problem, one that we have chosen to combat with real suspensions from the practice of law: “[W]hen an attorney engages in a course of conduct that violates DR 1-102(A)(4), the attorney will be actually suspended from the practice of law for an appropriate period of time.” (Emphasis added.) Disciplinary Counsel v. Fowerbaugh (1995), 74 Ohio St.3d 187, 191, 658 N.E.2d 237. In imposing a 12-month stayed suspension, the majority suggests that the mitigating evidence warrants an exception to this general rule. Because I cannot overlook the serious dishonesty…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Office of Disciplinary Counsel v. FowerbaughOhio Supreme Court · 1995
- Office of Disciplinary Counsel v. MarkijohnOhio Supreme Court · 2003
- Disciplinary Counsel v. RooneyOhio Supreme Court · 2006
- Disciplinary Counsel v. KingOhio Supreme Court · 2004