Office of Disciplinary Counsel v. Woods

I concur in the judgment of the majority. I, too, would concur with the decisions of the *75panel and the board that petitioner be reinstated.

I cannnot concur, however, in the majority’s feeble attempt to distinguish this case from Disciplinary Counsel v. Bell (1988), 39 Ohio St. 3d 276, 530 N.E. 2d 404. Nor can I concur with the majority, no matter how the words are twisted, that it is proper, under existing Gov. Bar R. V(28), to consider the gravity of a petitioner’s misconduct. In so finding, the majority,1 in searching for a way to give credence to its previous decision in Bell, once again…