Cleveland Bar Ass'n v. Armon
Cases that cite this one
8 later published cases cite this decision.
- Office of Disciplinary Counsel v. Ryan (Ohio 2000)
- Cincinnati Bar Ass'n v. Wolosin (Ohio 1999)
- Toledo Bar Ass'n v. Gatwood (Ohio 1998)
- Office of Disciplinary Counsel v. Clifton (Ohio 1997)
- Disciplinary Counsel v. Ryan (Ohio 2000)
- Toledo Bar Assn. v. Gatwood (Ohio 1998)
- Disciplinary Counsel v. Donnell (Ohio 1997)
- Cleveland Bar Assn. v. Armon (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
This case involves a lawyer who failed in his duty to his clients by appropriating his clients’ funds, neglecting their interests, and engaging in a pattern of deceiving them. The number of these incidents indicates that respondent cannot or will not conform to our required ethical standards. Moreover,
We accept the findings and conclusions of the board. We believe, however, that conduct such as respondent’s warrants a more severe sanction than an indefinite suspension. Respondent’s pattern of client neglect and total disregard of our investigatory process renders him unfit to be continued on the roll of those who are allowed to engage in the practice of law in Ohio. We have held in many cases that appropriation of client funds and a pattern of neglect of client interests warrant disbarment. Cuyahoga Cty. Bar Assn. v. Churilla (1997), 78 Ohio St.3d 348, 678 N.E.2d 515; Columbus Bar Assn. v. Sterner (1996), 77 Ohio St.3d 164, 167, 672 N.E.2d 633, 635, and cases cited therein. Respondent is hereby permanently disbarred from the practice of law in Ohio. Costs taxed to respondent.
Judgment accordingly.
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.