Legal Opinion

Cincinnati Bar Ass'n v. Fennell

Ohio Supreme Court

Decided July 9, 1980No. D.D. No. 80-2PublishedCited by 7 opinions

1Per curiam

Respondent has filed objections to the findings of fact and recommendation of the board, setting forth the following:

“I. Respondent was denied his rights under the Fourteenth Amendment of the United States Constitution, of equal protection and his rights of due process of law. Respondent was denied his rights to cross-exam [sic] witnesses who testified against him.
“11. The evidence did not support the panel findings on Counts 4, 5,10,13 and 18 of the complaint. There was insufficient evidence to support a finding against respondent as to those counts and the findings and decision of the panel…

2Cited by7 opinions

  1. Lawyer Disciplinary Board v. KupecWest Virginia Supreme Court · 1998
  2. Toledo Bar Ass'n v. DziennyOhio Supreme Court · 1995
  3. Zauderer v. Office of Disciplinary Counsel of the Supreme Court of OhioSupreme Court of the United States · 1985
  4. Toledo Bar Assn. v. DziennyOhio Supreme Court · 1995
  5. In Re RussoSupreme Court of Kansas · 1988

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