History
  • No items yet
midpage
Office of Disciplinary Counsel v. Williams
553 N.E.2d 1082
Ohio
1990
Check Treatment
Per Curiam.

Having thoroughly reviewed the record, we agree with the-board’s findings of misconduct and its recommendation. Accordingly, respondent is hereby publicly reprimanded for having violated DR 5-103(A), 5-107(A)(l), and 1-102(A)(5). Costs taxed to respondent.

Judgment accordingly.

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

Case Details

Case Name: Office of Disciplinary Counsel v. Williams
Court Name: Ohio Supreme Court
Date Published: May 9, 1990
Citation: 553 N.E.2d 1082
Docket Number: No. 89-2171
Court Abbreviation: Ohio
AI-generated responses must be verified and are not legal advice.
Log In