Toledo Bar Ass'n v. DeMars
Ohio Supreme Court
1Per curiam
Respondent does not remonstrate against the board’s findings that he has violated several Disciplinary Rules; rather, he protests the severity of the sanction, i.e., indefinite suspension from the practice of law, which the board recommended. Respondent urges the court to defer imposition of the suspension for two years upon the following conditions: that he refrain from practicing law for another year, permit the local bar association to monitor his work upon resumption of his practice, make any restitution ordered by the court, abstain from any consumption of alcohol and continue his active…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- In Re LanahanArizona Supreme Court · 1964
- Ohio State Bar Ass'n v. RoestOhio Supreme Court · 1978
- In Re WootenSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1973
3Cited by2 opinions
- Matter of ClyneSupreme Court of Delaware · 1990
- Bar Ass'n of Greater Cleveland v. WilsmanOhio Supreme Court · 1984