History
  • No items yet
midpage
84 Ohio St. 3d 375
Ohio
1999

Lead Opinion

Per Curiam.

We adopt the findings, conclusions, and recommendation of the board. Respondent’s pattern of neglect and misrepresentation coupled with his cavalier attitude towards the disciplinary proceedings establishes his present unfitness to practice law in Ohio. Respondent is hereby indefinitely suspended from the practice of law in Ohio.

Judgment accordingly.

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





Dissenting Opinion

Lundberg Stratton, J.,

dissenting. I dissent from the majority’s decision to indefinitely suspend the respondent and would disbar the respondent. His problem, time after time, of obtaining retainers and utterly failing to do anything about the matter, or to return files and retainer upon discharge, is akin to theft. Respondent’s failure to cooperate in the disciplinary process or to present any mitigation evidence to explain his abusive course of conduct further supports that he is totally unfit to continue the practice of law in this state. Therefore, I would disbar the respondent.

Cook, J., concurs in the foregoing dissenting opinion.

Case Details

Case Name: Columbus Bar Ass'n v. Emerson
Court Name: Ohio Supreme Court
Date Published: Jan 13, 1999
Citations: 84 Ohio St. 3d 375; 704 N.E.2d 238; No. 98-1744
Docket Number: No. 98-1744
Court Abbreviation: Ohio
AI-generated responses must be verified
and are not legal advice.
Log In
    Columbus Bar Ass'n v. Emerson, 84 Ohio St. 3d 375