Legal Opinion

Office of Disciplinary Counsel v. Rieser

Ohio Supreme Court

Decided May 3, 1995No. 94-2650PublishedCited by 6 opinions

1Per curiam

We have reviewed the record and agree that respondent neglected two cases in violation of DR 6-101(A)(3). We also agree with the recommended sanction. Therefore, we hereby reprimand David Paul Rieser for this misconduct. Costs taxed to respondent.

Judgment accordingly.

Douglas, Resnick, F.E. Sweeney and Cook, JJ., concur. Moyer, C.J., and Wright, J., dissent. Pfeifer, J., dissents and would dismiss the cause.

2Cited by6 opinions

  1. Columbus Bar Ass'n v. RieserOhio Supreme Court · 2001
  2. Columbus Bar Association v. Rieser.Ohio Supreme Court · 2018
  3. Disciplinary Counsel v. RieserOhio Supreme Court · 1995
  4. Columbus Bar Assn. v. RieserOhio Supreme Court · 2001
  5. Columbus Bar Ass'n v. RieserOhio Supreme Court · 2002

1 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