Ohio Supreme Court, 1999

Akron Bar Ass'n v. Snyder

Akron Bar Ass'n v. Snyder
Ohio Supreme Court · Decided November 10, 1999 · Cook, Disbar, Discipline, Douglas, Factor, Moyer, Pfeifer, Resnick, Respondent, Stratton, Sweeney, View
87 Ohio St. 3d 211; 718 N.E.2d 1271
Akron Bar Ass'n v. Snyder

Cases that cite this one

22 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, conclusions, and recommendation of the board. Neglect of legal matters and a failure to cooperate in the ensuing disciplinary investigation generally warrant an indefinite suspension from the practice of law in Ohio. Cleveland Bar Assn. v. Rollins (1999), 84 Ohio St.3d 408, 410, 704 N.E.2d 1210, 1211. The board properly noted that the misconduct charged in the complaint occurred in the same period of time as the charges involved in respondent’s previous disciplinary case, which resulted in an indefinite suspension, and that these new charges did not require a significantly different sanction. See, e.g., Cuyahoga Cty. Bar Assn. v. Jaynes (1993), 66 Ohio St.3d 245, 246, 611 N.E.2d 807, 808. Respondent is hereby indefinitely suspended from the practice of law in Ohio and is ordered to make full restitution to his clients, Shalhoub and Conner, and to the Clients’ Security Fund. Costs taxed to respondent.

Judgment accordingly.

Moyer, C.J., Douglas, Resnick, F.E. Sweeney, Pfeifer and Lundberg Stratton, JJ., concur. Cook, J., dissents. *213Cook, J., dissenting. In view of the aggravating factor of respondent’s prior discipline, I would disbar.

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