Hall Approved Free Access to American Case Law
Ohio Supreme Court, 1990

Office of Disciplinary Counsel v. Immelt

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

Office of Disciplinary Counsel v. Immelt

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.

↑