Legal Opinion

Disciplinary Counsel v. Brown

Ohio Supreme Court

Decided March 19, 2009No. 2008-1573PublishedCited by 12 opinions

1Per curiam

{¶ 1} In June 2006, relator, Disciplinary Counsel, charged respondent, Bruce Andrew Brown, also known as Amir Jamal Tauwab, Bruce Brown, Bruce A. Brown, and B. Andrew Brown, with six counts of unauthorized practice of law. The Board on the Unauthorized Practice of Law concluded that respondent had practiced law in violation of Ohio licensure requirements and recommends that we enjoin respondent from committing further illegal acts, that we impose a civil penalty of $50,000, and that we order respondent to show cause why he should not be held in contempt for violating the injunction we imposed…

2Cases cited18 opinions

  1. Land Title Abstract & Trust Co. v. DworkenOhio Supreme Court · 1934
  2. Office of Disciplinary Counsel v. ColemanOhio Supreme Court · 2000
  3. Cleveland Bar Ass'n v. CompManagement, Inc.Ohio Supreme Court · 2006
  4. Ohio State Bar Ass'n v. KolodnerOhio Supreme Court · 2004
  5. Cleveland Bar Ass'n v. HenleyOhio Supreme Court · 2002

13 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by12 opinions

  1. In re Virgin Islands Bar Ass'n CommitteeSupreme Court of The Virgin Islands · 2013
  2. Disciplinary Counsel v. CaseyOhio Supreme Court · 2013
  3. Cincinnati Bar Assn. v. Foreclosure Solutions, L.L.C.Ohio Supreme Court · 2009
  4. Disciplinary Counsel v. PrattOhio Supreme Court · 2010
  5. Disciplinary Counsel v. HernandezOhio Supreme Court · 2014

7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

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

Powered by the Exa API