Ohio Supreme Court, 1994

Office of Disciplinary Counsel v. Hart

Office of Disciplinary Counsel v. Hart
Ohio Supreme Court · Decided September 28, 1994 · Douglas, Moyer, Pfeifer, Resnick, Sweeney, Wright
70 Ohio St. 3d 374; 639 N.E.2d 48

Office of Disciplinary Counsel v. Hart

Opinion of the Court

Per Curiam.

We concur in the findings and recommendation of the board. Respondent’s diligent compliance with conditions of his probation and his pharmacy license suspension, his negative drug test results, the fact that his misconduct did not relate to his practice of law, as well as the other mitigating evidence, indicates that a stay is appropriate. Respondent is hereby suspended from the practice of law for six months, but the suspension is stayed so long as no subsequent disciplinary complaints are filed against respondent within the six-month period. 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.