Ohio Supreme Court, 1999

Office of Disciplinary Counsel v. Jackson

Ohio Supreme Court · Decided July 7, 1999 · Cook, Douglas, Moyer, Pfeifer, Resnick, Stratton, Sweeney

86 Ohio St. 3d 104

Cases that cite this one

2 later published cases cite this decision.

Ohio State Bar Assn. v. Bruner (Slip Opinion) (Ohio 2021)
Disciplinary Counsel v. Jackson (Ohio 1999)

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.

Dissenting Opinion

Lundberg Stratton, J.,

dissenting. I dissent and would suspend respondent for one year.

Opinion of the Court

Per Curiam.

We adopt the findings of the board. Because the parties stipulated to the violations, we also adopt the conclusion of the board that respondent violated DR 3-101(B) and Gov.Bar R. V(8)(E) and VI(6)(B), despite the fact that respondent was not charged with the violation of these rules in the disciplinary complaint with respect to his Pike County representation. We deem that respondent’s review of and consent to the stipulated facts and the stipulated violations, and his agreed waiver of a hearing, satisfied the due process requirements of In re Ruffalo (1968), 390 U.S. 544, 550-551, 88 S.Ct. 1222, 1226, 20 L.Ed.2d 117, 122-123, as to these findings and conclusions. We also adopt the *106recommendation of the board. Respondent is hereby indefinitely suspended from the practice of law in Ohio. Costs are taxed to respondent.

Judgment accordingly.

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

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