Ohio Supreme Court, 1994

Office of Disciplinary Counsel v. Talbert

Ohio Supreme Court · Decided December 30, 1994 · Douglas, Moyer, Pfeifer, Resnick, Sweeney, Wright

71 Ohio St. 3d 438; 644 N.E.2d 310

Cases that cite this one

1 later published case cites this decision.

State v. Simko (Ohio 1995)

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.

Having thoroughly reviewed the record, we agree with the board’s finding of misconduct and its recommendations. Accordingly, respondent is hereby publicly reprimanded. Costs taxed to respondent.

Judgment accordingly.

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

Dissenting Opinion

Pfeifer, J.,

dissenting. The facts as presented in this case do not merit disciplinary action. However, respondent did agree with the relator’s recommendation of a public reprimand. If there are some other facts that yielded this result, they should be revealed to this court. If not, the case should be dismissed.

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