Legal Opinion

Office of Disciplinary Counsel v. Dzienny

Ohio Supreme Court

Decided March 17, 2003No. 2002-0294Published

1Opinion of the Court

{¶ 1} This cause came on for further consideration upon the filing of an application for reinstatement by respondent, Michael Dzienny, a.k.a. Michael Andrew Dzienny, Attorney Registration No. 0037618, last known business address in Toledo, Ohio.

{¶ 2} The court coming now to consider its order of July 31, 2002, wherein the court, pursuant to Gov.Bar R. V(6)(B)(3), suspended respondent for a period of 18 months with one year suspended on condition, finds that respondent has substantially complied with that order and with the provisions of Gov.Bar R. V(10)(A). Therefore,

{¶ 3} IT IS ORDERED by…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Toledo Bar Ass'n v. DziennyOhio Supreme Court · 1995
  2. Toledo Bar Assn. v. DziennyOhio Supreme Court · 1995
  3. Toledo Bar Assn. v. DziennyOhio Supreme Court · 2002

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

Powered by the Exa API