Ohio Supreme Court, 1998

Cincinnati Bar Ass'n v. Fidler

Cincinnati Bar Ass'n v. Fidler
Ohio Supreme Court · Decided October 14, 1998 · Cook, Douglas, Moyer, Pfeifer, Resnick, Stratton, Sweeney
83 Ohio St. 3d 396; 700 N.E.2d 323
Cincinnati Bar Ass'n v. Fidler

Cases that cite this one

13 later published cases cite this decision.

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 adopt the findings of fact of the board. We conclude that respondent’s convictions for shoplifting were, as respondent stipulated, in violation of DR 1-102(A)(3), (4), and (6). We further conclude that respondent’s failure to report his 1985 conviction when specifically questioned violated DR 1-103(A).

Recently, when an attorney withheld the truth during a disciplinary investigation, we imposed a definite suspension. Butler Cty. Bar Assn. v. Derivan (1998), 81 Ohio St.3d 300, 691 N.E.2d 256. We find a definite suspension appropriate in this case. Respondent is hereby suspended from the practice of law for eighteen months with one year of the suspension stayed pending successful completion of a one-year probation period and appropriate counseling to address the problems that caused respondent to engage in the underlying misconduct. Cost 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.