Ohio Supreme Court, 1991

Cincinnati Bar Ass'n v. Spitz

Ohio Supreme Court · Decided December 11, 1991 · No. 91-1250 · Brown, Douglas, Holmes, Moyer, Resnick, Sweeney, Wright

62 Ohio St. 3d 178; 580 N.E.2d 1071; 1991 Ohio LEXIS 2868

Cases that cite this one

4 later published cases cite this decision.

Cincinnati Bar Ass'n v. Spitz (Ohio 2003)
Cincinnati Bar Ass'n v. Spitz (Ohio 2000)
Cincinnati Bar Assn. v. Spitz (Ohio 2000)
Cincinnati Bar Ass'n v. Spitz (Ohio 1992)

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.

After careful consideration of the record before us, we concur in the board’s findings of respondent’s violation of the Code of Professional Responsibility. We decline, however, to adopt the board’s recom*180mended sanction, finding that respondent’s misconduct warrants a more severe penalty. We thus suspend respondent from the practice of law in Ohio for a period of six months, with reinstatement conditioned upon repayment of the retainer fees tendered to him by his clients. Costs taxed to the respondent.

Judgment accordingly.

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

Dissenting Opinion

Herbert R. Brown, J.,

dissenting. In this case the panel who heard the evidence believed the appropriate sanction to be a public reprimand. The Board of Commissioners on Grievances and Discipline also recommended a public reprimand as the appropriate sanction. Considering the record, I would not reject those recommendations.

Case-law data current through September 30, 2026. Source: CourtListener bulk data.