Ohio Supreme Court, 2000

Akron Bar Ass'n v. Bojonell

Ohio Supreme Court · Decided February 23, 2000 · Cook, Douglas, Moyer, Pfeifer, Resnick, Stratton, Sweeney

88 Ohio St. 3d 154; 724 N.E.2d 401

Cases that cite this one

4 later published cases cite this decision.

Cincinnati Bar Assn. v. Foreclosure Solutions, L.L.C. (Ohio 2009)
Bergantzel v. Mlynarik (Iowa 2000)
Disciplinary Counsel v. Robson (Ohio 2007)
Akron Bar Assn. v. Bojonell (Ohio 2000)

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.

As we have previously held in a matter very similar to this, representing others by advising them of their rights and communicating on their behalf to adverse parties about settlements of causes of action constitutes the practice of law. Cincinnati Bar Assn. v. Cromwell (1998), 82 Ohio St.3d 255, 695 N.E.2d 243.

Respondent is hereby enjoined from engaging in any further activities that might constitute the unauthorized practice of law. Cost are 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.