Legal Opinion

In re Nicotera

Ohio Supreme Court

Decided December 9, 1992No. 92-1486PublishedCited by 1 opinion

1Per curiam

When an attorney admitted to the practice of law in Ohio is disciplined by another jurisdiction, Gov.Bar R. V(11)(F)(4) requires this court to “impose the identical or comparable discipline imposed in the other jurisdiction * * unless the attorney proves by clear and convincing evidence that such discipline would be unwarranted. Nicotera has not done so. Moreover, his inactive status in Ohio does not preclude discipline. Accordingly, Thomas C. Nicotera is publicly reprimanded. Costs taxed to respondent.

Judgment accordingly.

Moyer, C.J., Sweeney, Holmes, Douglas, Wright, H. Brown and Resnick,…

2Cited by1 opinion

  1. Disciplinary Counsel v. Pickrel (Slip Opinion)Ohio Supreme Court · 2017

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

Powered by the Exa API