Office of Disciplinary Counsel v. Cordova

Ohio Supreme Court
Office of Disciplinary Counsel v. Cordova, 67 Ohio St. 3d 25 (Ohio 1993)
615 N.E.2d 1035
Douglas, Moyer, Pfeifer, Resnick, Sweeney, Wright

Office of Disciplinary Counsel v. Cordova

Opinion of the Court

Per Curiam.

We concur in the findings of misconduct by the board. However, we differ with the board’s recommendation. We order instead that respondent be publicly reprimanded. Costs taxed to respondent.

Judgment accordingly.

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

Dissenting Opinion

Wright, J.,

dissenting. I would follow the recommendation of the Board of Commissioners on Grievances and Discipline and suspend respondent from the practice of law for one year, with six months suspended upon condition that respondent not be found in violation of any other Disciplinary Rules for three years.

Moyer, C.J., concurs in the foregoing dissenting opinion.

Reference

Cited By
2 cases
Status
Published