History
  • No items yet
midpage
Office of Disciplinary Counsel v. Ressing
53 Ohio St. 3d 265
| Ohio | 1990
|
Check Treatment
Per Curiam.

We agree with the board’s findings of misconduct and its recommendation. Thus, we hereby publicly reprimand respondent for having violated DR 1-102(A)(6). 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. Ressing
Court Name: Ohio Supreme Court
Date Published: Sep 12, 1990
Citation: 53 Ohio St. 3d 265
Docket Number: No. 90-403
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.