midpage

Stark County Bar Ass'n v. OsborneStark County Bar Ass'n v. Osborne

Ohio Supreme Court
Oct 16, 1991
No. 91-855
Versions:

Lead Opinion

Per Curiam.

We agree with the board’s findings, but decline to follow its recommendation as to the penalty. We find a six-month suspension insufficient. As the panel noted, this is the second time Osborne has violated the Code of Professional Responsibility. In view of his past conduct, which involved conflicts of interest, a six-month suspension is too light a penalty for this repeat offender. See Gov.Bar R. V(8). Moreover, Osborne compounded his offense by claiming that he misunderstood the restraining order. His argument that the order’s language somehow excluded the residence was indefensible; his claim that he so believed is incredible. Therefore, respondent, Harry K. Osborne, Jr., is suspended from the practice of law in Ohio for one year. Costs taxed to respondent.

Judgment accordingly.

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





Dissenting Opinion

Herbert R. Brown, J.,

dissenting. I would suspend the respondent for six months as recommended by the Board of Commissioners on Grievances and Discipline.

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

Case Details

Case Name: Stark County Bar Ass'n v. Osborne
Court Name: Ohio Supreme Court
Date Published: Oct 16, 1991
Citations: 62 Ohio St. 3d 77; 578 N.E.2d 455; 1991 Ohio LEXIS 2292; No. 91-855
Docket Number: No. 91-855
Court Abbreviation: Ohio
Log In