Case ID: ohio-st-3d_15/html/0033-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "\n      Per Curiam.\n    ", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Office of Disciplinary Counsel v. Heck.
    [Cite as Disciplinary Counsel v. Heck (1984), 15 Ohio St. 3d 33.]
    (D.D. No. 84-15
    December 13, 1984.)
    
      Mr. Angelo J. Gagliardo, disciplinary counsel, and Mr. Mark H. Aultman, for relator.
   Per Curiam.

An assiduous scrutiny of the record compels us to accept the findings of the board. Although the commingling of client funds with those of the attorney, to the prejudice of a client, warrants strong disciplinary action, it is respondent’s demeanor throughout these proceedings that is ultimately responsible for the gravity of the sanction we impose today.

Accordingly, respondent is hereby indefinitely suspended from the practice of law.

Judgment accordingly.

Celebrezze, C.J., W. Brown, Sweeney, Locher, Holmes, C. Brown and J. P. Celebrezze, JJ., concur.