Case ID: ohio-st-3d_51/html/0098-01.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. Freeman.
    [Cite as Disciplinary Counsel v. Freeman (1990), 51 Ohio St. 3d 98.]
    (No. D.D. 88-30
    Submitted February 13, 1990
    Decided May 23, 1990.)
    
      
      J. Warren Bettis, disciplinary counsel, and Mark H. Aultman, for relator.
    
      Butler, Cineione, DiCuceio & Dritz and David B. Barnhart, for respondent.
   Per Curiam.

Having thoroughly reviewed this record, we agree that respondent violated DR 6-101(A)(3) and 1-102(A)(6). We also agree with the board’s recommendation. Accordingly, respondent is hereby suspended from the practice of law in Ohio for six months, but this sanction is suspended on the condition that he satisfactorily completes a two-year monitored probation period and complies with the five requirements enumerated in the panel’s opinion. Costs taxed to respondent.

Judgment accordingly.

Moyer, C.J., Sweeney, Holmes, Douglas, Wright, H. Brown and Re snick, JJ., concur.