History
  • No items yet
midpage
Cincinnati Bar Ass'n v. Fidler
83 Ohio St. 3d 396
| Ohio | 1998
|
Check Treatment
Per Curiam.

We adopt the findings of fact of the board. We conclude that respondent’s convictions for shoplifting were, as respondent stipulated, in violation of DR 1-102(A)(3), (4), and (6). We further conclude that respondent’s failure to report his 1985 conviction when specifically questioned violated DR 1-103(A).

Recently, when an attorney withheld the truth during a disciplinary investigation, we imposed a definite suspension. Butler Cty. Bar Assn. v. Derivan (1998), 81 Ohio St.3d 300, 691 N.E.2d 256. We find a definite suspension appropriate in this case. Respondent is hereby suspended from the practice of law for eighteen months with one year of the suspension stayed pending successful completion of a one-year probation period and appropriate counseling to address the problems that caused respondent to engage in the underlying misconduct. Cost taxed to respondent.

Judgment accordingly.

Moyer, C.J., Douglas, Resnick, F.E. Sweeney, Pfeifer, Cook and Lundberg Stratton, JJ., concur.

Case Details

Case Name: Cincinnati Bar Ass'n v. Fidler
Court Name: Ohio Supreme Court
Date Published: Oct 14, 1998
Citation: 83 Ohio St. 3d 396
Docket Number: No. 97-2641
Court Abbreviation: Ohio
AI-generated responses must be verified and are not legal advice.
Your Notebook is empty. To add cases, bookmark them from your search, or select Add Cases to extract citations from a PDF or a block of text.