Legal Opinion

Toledo Bar Ass'n v. Candiello

Ohio Supreme Court

Decided March 10, 1999No. 98-1230PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Per curiam

We adopt the findings of the board. As the board noted, respondent drafted wills for Bonner and Simon, in which he or his secretary was named as a beneficiary before DR 5-101 was amended in May 1996 to prohibit an attorney from drafting such a will or trust. Nevertheless, for reasons which we expressed in Disciplinary Counsel v. Galinas (1996), 76 Ohio St.3d 87, 90, 666 N.E.2d 1083, 1086, we conclude, as did the board, that in each case respondent violated DR 1 — 102(A)(6).

Respondent also suggested that Bonner invest in a company that he owned. When Bonner failed to realize the profit she was…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Office of Disciplinary Counsel v. GalinasOhio Supreme Court · 1996
  2. Miami County Bar Ass'n v. ThompsonOhio Supreme Court · 1997

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. Toledo Bar Assn. v. CookOhio Supreme Court · 2002
  2. Toledo Bar Ass'n v. CookOhio Supreme Court · 2002

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

Powered by the Exa API