Ohio Supreme Court, 2013

Disciplinary Counsel v. Dann

Ohio Supreme Court · Decided June 11, 2013 · Connor, Donnell, French, Kennedy, Lanzinger, Neill, Pfeifer

136 Ohio St. 3d 1203; 990 N.E.2d 609

Cases that cite this one

1 later published case cites this decision.

Disciplinary Counsel v. Dann (Ohio 2013)

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

{¶ 1} This cause came on for further consideration upon the filing of an application for reinstatement by respondent, Marc Edward Dann, Attorney Registration No. 0039425, last known business address in Cleveland, Ohio.

*1204{¶ 2} The court, coming now to consider its order of November 20, 2012, wherein the court, pursuant to Gov.Bar R. V(6)(B)(3), suspended respondent for a period of six months, finds that respondent has substantially complied with that order and with the provisions of Gov.Bar R. V(10)(A).

{¶ 3} Therefore, it is ordered by this court that respondent is reinstated to the practice of law in the state of Ohio.

{¶ 4} It is further ordered that the clerk of this court issue certified copies of this order as provided for in Gov.Bar R. V(8)(D)(1), that publication be made as provided for in Gov.Bar R. V(8)(D)(2), and that respondent bear the costs of publication.

O’Connor, C.J., and Pfeifer, O’Donnell, Lanzinger, Kennedy, French, and O’Neill, JJ., concur.

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