Ohio Supreme Court, 1996

Office of Disciplinary Counsel v. Brown

Office of Disciplinary Counsel v. Brown
Ohio Supreme Court · Decided November 13, 1996 · Cook, Douglas, Moyer, Pfeifer, Resnick, Stratton, Sweeney
77 Ohio St. 3d 91; 671 N.E.2d 232

Office of Disciplinary Counsel v. Brown

Opinion of the Court

Per Curiam.

We adopt the findings, conclusions, and recommendation of the board. The record indicates that respondent requires rehabilitation. This court’s duty to the public requires that respondent affirmatively demonstrate his rehabilitation before we allow him to resume his place on the rolls of those permitted to practice law in Ohio. We have thus far suspended respondent from the practice of law for an interim period. We now hereby suspend respondent from the practice of law for an indefinite period. Costs taxed to the respondent.

Judgment accordingly.

Moyer, C.J., Douglas, Resnick, F.E. Sweeney, Pfeifer, Cook and Stratton, JJ., concur.

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