Ohio Supreme Court, 1997

Miami County Bar Ass'n v. Thompson

Ohio Supreme Court · Decided April 2, 1997 · Cook, Douglas, Moyer, Pfeifer, Resnick, Stratton, Sweeney

78 Ohio St. 3d 103; 676 N.E.2d 879

Cases that cite this one

6 later published cases cite this decision.

Stark County Bar Ass'n v. Buttacavoli (Ohio 2002)
Stark Cty. Bar Assn. v. Buttacavoli (Ohio 2002)
Toledo Bar Ass'n v. Candiello (Ohio 1999)
Miami County Bar Ass'n v. Thompson (Ohio 1998)
Miami Cty. Bar Assn. v. Thompson (Ohio 1998)
Miami Cty. Bar Assn. v. Thompson (Ohio 1997)

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 accept the findings and conclusions of the board, but believe that a more stringent penalty is warranted. Respondent represented the lender in this case, but his arrangement with the parties enabled him to receive a fee from the borrower for each loan made by the lender. Despite the fact that the lender independently decided to make each loan, this arrangement put respondent in a position where he could profit by withholding information from or exercising influence on the lender.

A lawyer should avoid even the appearance of impropriety and the implication that his professional judgment on behalf of a client could be affected by the *105lawyer’s own interests. Respondent is therefore suspended for one year from the practice of law. Costs are taxed to respondent.

Judgment accordingly.

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

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