Legal Opinion

Disciplinary Counsel v. Schuman.

Ohio Supreme Court

Decided December 6, 2017No. 2016-1834PublishedCited by 26 opinions

1Per curiam

*48 {¶ 1} Respondent, Andrew Robert Schuman, of Bowling Green, Ohio, Attorney Registration No. 0072950, was admitted to the practice of law in Ohio in 2000. In June 2016, relator, disciplinary counsel, charged him with making misrepresentations to a court in order to collect a clearly excessive fee. Schuman stipulated that he had committed the charged professional-conduct-rule violations. After a hearing, the Board of Professional Conduct issued a report recommending that we suspend him for one year, with six months stayed on conditions. Schuman objects to the board's report, primarily arguing…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. Office of Disciplinary Counsel v. FowerbaughOhio Supreme Court · 1995
  2. Disciplinary Counsel v. O'NeillOhio Supreme Court · 2004
  3. Disciplinary Counsel v. RohrerOhio Supreme Court · 2009
  4. Toledo Bar Association v. DeMarcoOhio Supreme Court · 2015
  5. Toledo Bar Assn. v. MillerOhio Supreme Court · 2012

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

3Cited by26 opinions

  1. State ex rel. Dobson v. Handwork (Slip Opinion)Ohio Supreme Court · 2020
  2. Disciplinary Counsel v. Harmon (Slip Opinion)Ohio Supreme Court · 2019
  3. Dayton Bar Assn. v. Sullivan (Slip Opinion)Ohio Supreme Court · 2020
  4. Disciplinary Counsel v. Adelstein (Slip Opinion)Ohio Supreme Court · 2020
  5. Disciplinary Counsel v. Piazza (Slip Opinion)Ohio Supreme Court · 2020

21 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