Legal Opinion

Office of Disciplinary Counsel v. Clifton

Ohio Supreme Court

Decided October 1, 1997No. 96-2805PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Per curiam

The respondent undertook the dual roles of guardian and attorney for the guardianship of both the person and the estate of an incompetent woman who it appears had no close relatives. As the record indicates, respondent failed miserably in the performance of his duties in both roles. Over a six-year period respondent wasted his ward’s considerable estate through both negligence and design. Just as important, over those same six years, respondent failed to provide adequately for the care and comfort of his ward.

A guardian of the estate is required by R.C. 2111.14(B) to manage the estate for the…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Miami County Bar Ass'n v. HallowsOhio Supreme Court · 1997
  2. Cleveland Bar Ass'n v. ArmonOhio Supreme Court · 1997
  3. Office of Disciplinary Counsel v. LuceyOhio Supreme Court · 1984
  4. Tonge v. SalisburySupreme Court of Rhode Island · 1934

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Cincinnati Bar Ass'n v. YoungOhio Supreme Court · 2000
  2. Cincinnati Bar Assn. v. YoungOhio Supreme Court · 2000
  3. Disciplinary Counsel v. DonnellOhio Supreme Court · 1997

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

Powered by the Exa API