Hall Approved Free Access to American Case Law
Ohio Supreme Court, 1993

Office of Disciplinary Counsel v. Kearns

Office of Disciplinary Counsel v. Kearns
Ohio Supreme Court · Decided April 21, 1993 · Douglas, Moyer, Pfeifer, Resnick, Sweeney, Wright
66 Ohio St. 3d 140; 609 N.E.2d 1252; 1993 Ohio LEXIS 725

Office of Disciplinary Counsel v. Kearns

Opinion of the Court

Per Curiam.

Respondent has failed to show why he should not receive discipline comparable to that imposed by the Supreme Court of Colorado. Accordingly, we hereby suspend respondent from the practice of law in Ohio for the duration of his Colorado suspension. However, before respondent will be reinstated to the practice of law in Ohio, he must present evidence that he *141has made the restitution ordered by the Colorado Supreme Court, as required by Gov. Bar R. V(10)(E)(1). Costs taxed to respondent.

Judgment accordingly.

Moyer, C.J., A.W. Sweeney, Douglas, Wright, Resnick, F.E. Sweeney and Pfeifer, JJ., concur.

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

↑