Legal Opinion

Cincinnati Bar Ass'n v. Wallace

Ohio Supreme Court

Decided November 4, 1998No. 98-780PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Per curiam

After review, we concur with the findings, conclusions, and recommendation of the board, including finding that respondent’s conduct “was sufficiently inappropriate, unprofessional, and improper” to sustain a violation of DR 1-102(A)(6). We reject the objections filed by both relator and by respondent to the board’s findings, conclusions, and recommendation.

We find that relator did not establish by clear and convincing evidence that respondent participated in an act intended to “hinder, delay, or defraud” creditors or otherwise violated R.C. 1336.04. Daniels’s enforcement action was for…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. In Re RuffaloSupreme Court of the United States · 1968
  2. Bronston v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1973
  3. Cincinnati Bar Ass'n v. MarsickOhio Supreme Court · 1998
  4. Toledo Bar Ass'n v. WoodOhio Supreme Court · 1987
  5. Office of Disciplinary Counsel v. ColumbroOhio Supreme Court · 1993

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Disciplinary Counsel v. StaffordOhio Supreme Court · 2011
  2. Cincinnati Bar Assn. v. WallaceOhio Supreme Court · 1998
  3. Disciplinary Counsel v. O'BrienOhio Supreme Court · 2008

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

Powered by the Exa API