Ohio Supreme Court, 1990

Office of Disciplinary Counsel v. Immelt

Ohio Supreme Court · Decided November 7, 1990 · Brown, Douglas, Holmes, Moyer, Resnick, Sweeney, Wright

55 Ohio St. 3d 17; 562 N.E.2d 888; 1990 Ohio LEXIS 1388

Cases that cite this one

3 later published cases cite this decision.

In re the Disciplinary Proceeding Against Immelt (Wash. 1992)
McKay v. City of New York (District Court, S.D. New York 2014)
State v. Stevens, Unpublished Decision (9-28-2001) (Ohio Ct. App. 2001)

This list shows which later cases cite this one. It does not say how they treated it, and no review of that has been done. Not a substitute for Shepard’s or KeyCite — verify before relying.

Opinion of the Court

Per Curiam.

Having thoroughly reviewed the record in this case, we *18concur in the board’s findings that respondent violated DR 1-102(A)(3), (4), and (5), and 9-102(B)(4). We also agree with the board’s recommendation. Therefore, we order that respondent be indefinitely suspended from the practice of law in Ohio. Respondent is further ordered to show complete restitution and adequate recovery upon any application he makes for readmission to the Ohio Bar. Costs taxed to respondent.

Judgment accordingly.

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

Dissenting Opinion

Resnick, J.,

dissenting. The conduct of the respondent merits his disbarment.

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.