Ohio Supreme Court, 1999

Office of Disciplinary Counsel v. Boylan

Office of Disciplinary Counsel v. Boylan
Ohio Supreme Court · Decided March 17, 1999 · Cook, Douglas, Moyer, Pfeifer, Resnick, Stratton, Sweeney
85 Ohio St. 3d 115; 707 N.E.2d 465

Office of Disciplinary Counsel v. Boylan

Opinion of the Court

Per Curiam.

We adopt the findings, conclusions, and recommendation of the board. The sanction of an indefinite suspension from the practice of law β€œis especially fitting * * * where neglect of a legal matter is coupled with a failure to cooperate in the ensuing disciplinary investigation.” Warren Cty. Bar Assn. v. Lieser (1997), 79 Ohio St.3d 488, 490, 683 N.E.2d 1148, 1149; see, also, Akron Bar Assn. v. Barnett (1997), 80 Ohio St.3d 269, 685 N.E.2d 1230. The record establishes that respondent exhibited a cavalier attitude toward both the representation of his client and the ensuing disciplinary investigation. Respondent is indefinitely suspended from the practice of law in Ohio. Costs 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.