Ohio Supreme Court, 1994

Office of Disciplinary Counsel v. Furtado

Ohio Supreme Court · Decided November 23, 1994 · Douglas, Her, Moyer, Payment, Pfeifer, Resnick, Respondent, Restitution, Sweeney, Wright

71 Ohio St. 3d 20; 641 N.E.2d 184; 1994 Ohio LEXIS 2587

Cases that cite this one

3 later published cases cite this decision.

Disciplinary Counsel v. Furtado. (Ohio 2017)
Disciplinary Counsel v. Furtado (Ohio 1997)
Disciplinary Counsel v. Furtado (Ohio 1994)

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.

We concur in the findings and recommendations of the board. Respondent is hereby suspended from the practice of law in Ohio for two years with credit given for time served. As a condition to reinstatement, respondent must complete her federal probation. Costs taxed to respondent.

Judgment accordingly.

Moyer, C.J., A.W. Sweeney, Douglas, Resnick, F.E. Sweeney and Pfeifer, JJ., concur. Wright, J., would also condition respondent’s reinstatement upon her full payment of restitution.

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