Mahoning County Bar Ass'n v. Theofilos, 36 Ohio St. 3d 43

Mahoning County Bar Ass'n v. Theofilos

36 Ohio St. 3d 43 | Ohio | 1988

Lead Opinion

Per Curiam.

This court finds that respondent violated the aforementioned Disciplinary Rule. While we adopt the board’s findings, we find that respondent’s conduct requires a more severe sanction than that recommended by the board. Accordingly, respondent is hereby ordered suspended from the practice of law in Ohio for one year. Costs taxed to respondent.

Judgment accordingly.

Moyer, C.J., Sweeney, Locher, Douglas, Wright and H. Brown, JJ., concur. Holmes, J., dissents.

Dissenting Opinion

Holmes, J.,

dissenting. I must dissent insofar as I would require as condition of reinstatement that the monies and assets received from this estate be returned to those who would otherwise have inherited such assets.