Legal Opinion

Disciplinary Counsel v. Bowman

Ohio Supreme Court

Decided August 23, 2006No. 2006-0444PublishedCited by 7 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtLundberg Stratton, J.

{¶ 1} We must decide in this case how to appropriately sanction respondent, Kevin Arthur Bowman of Dayton, Ohio, Attorney Registration No. 0068223, admitted to the Ohio bar in 1997, who stipulated that he had violated several Disciplinary Rules while representing clients in three cases. The Board of Commissioners on Grievances and Discipline recommended a sanction of suspension from the practice of law for two years, with one year stayed on conditions, and a term of probation. We hold this sanction to be inadequate.

{¶ 2} In June 2005, relator, Disciplinary Counsel, filed a complaint charging…

2Cases cited11 opinions

  1. Stark Cty. Bar Assn. v. ButtacavoliOhio Supreme Court · 2002
  2. Disciplinary Counsel v. FowerbaughOhio Supreme Court · 1995
  3. Disciplinary Counsel v. HunterOhio Supreme Court · 2005
  4. Disciplinary Counsel v. GoldenOhio Supreme Court · 2002
  5. Office of Disciplinary Counsel v. GoldenOhio Supreme Court · 2002

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

3Cited by7 opinions

  1. Disciplinary Counsel v. RidenbaughOhio Supreme Court · 2009
  2. Disciplinary Counsel v. ParkerOhio Supreme Court · 2007
  3. Columbus Bar Ass'n v. EllisOhio Supreme Court · 2008
  4. Disciplinary Counsel v. YoungOhio Supreme Court · 2007
  5. Erie-Huron Grievance Committee v. StollOhio Supreme Court · 2010

2 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