Disciplinary Counsel v. Brockler
Ohio Supreme Court
1DissentO’Connor, C.J.
{¶ 29} The preamble to the Ohio Rules of Professional Conduct, entitled “A Lawyer’s Responsibilities,” lays out broad obligations, recognizing that “a lawyer not only represents clients but has a special responsibility for the quality of justice” and that that responsibility extends “to practicing lawyers even when they are acting in a nonprofessional capacity.” Prof.Cond.R., Preamble [1], [3]. By imposing a marginal sanction — a fully stayed one-year suspension — on respondent, Aaron Brockler, the majority minimizes his significant ethical violations and does so based upon a myopic view of…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Cincinnati Bar Assn. v. StatzerOhio Supreme Court · 2003
- Disciplinary Counsel v. PotterOhio Supreme Court · 2010
- Disciplinary Counsel v. NiermeyerOhio Supreme Court · 2008
- Columbus Bar Ass'n v. KingOhio Supreme Court · 1998
- Cleveland Metropolitan Bar Ass'n v. GruttadaurioOhio Supreme Court · 2013
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.