Case ID: ohio-st-3d_68/html/0451-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "\n      Per Curiam.\n     Douglas, J.,", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Akron Bar Association v. Brustoski.
    [Cite as Akron Bar Assn. v. Brustoski (1994), 68 Ohio St.3d 451.]
    (No. 93-2531
    Submitted January 26, 1994
    Decided March 23, 1994.)
    
      
      Joseph S. Kodish, Ernest R. Stein and Kurt Weitendorf, for relator.
    
      A. Edward Bonetti, Jr., for respondent.
   Per Curiam.

We concur with the board’s findings of fact, but find disbarment to be the appropriate disciplinary action. For over one year, respondent abused his positions as a trusted former employee, an attorney, and an officer of the court to commit felonies. Respondent’s offenses disrupted the orderly administration of justice and warranted actual incarceration in prison for at least three years. Accordingly, respondent is hereby permanently disbarred from the practice of law in Ohio. Costs taxed to respondent.

Judgment accordingly.

Moyer, C.J., Resnick, F.E. Sweeney and Pfeifer, JJ., concur.

A.W. Sweeney, Douglas and Wright, JJ., dissent.

Douglas, J.,

dissenting. The relator, Akron Bar Association, the three-person panel of the Board of Commissioners on Grievances and Discipline and the .board itself all recommended indefinite suspension of respondent. I would adopt their recommendation and, therefore, I respectfully dissent.

A.W. Sweeney and Wright, JJ., concur in the foregoing dissenting opinion.