61 Ohio St. 3d 546 | Ohio | 1991
In objections to the board’s report, relator argues that the evidence substantiates disciplinary violations in addition to those found by the board. We disagree, and, therefore, hold that respondent violated DR 6-101(A)(3) in connection with Counts Two and Six as found by the board.
Relator also argues that these violations require a more severe sanction than the board recommended. We agree with relator on this point. Accordingly, we order that respondent be suspended from the practice of law in Ohio
Judgment accordingly.
