Case ID: ohio-st-3d_74/html/0006-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "\n      Per Curiam.\n     Cook, J.,", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Stark County Bar Association v. DePasquale.
    [Cite as Stark Cty. Bar Assn. v. DePasquale (1995), 74 Ohio St.3d 6.]
    (No. 95-1192
    Submitted July 26, 1995
    Decided October 25, 1995.)
    
      
      Kathleen Tatarsky, for relator.
    
      David, F. DePasquale, pro se.
    
   Per Curiam.

Upon review of the record, we concur in the board’s findings of misconduct and its recommended sanction. Respondent is, therefore, suspended from the practice of law in Ohio for one year; however, this suspension period is suspended and he is placed on a two-year probation period, provided that during this period no disciplinary complaints against respondent are certified to the board by a probable cause panel and that respondent meets regularly with an attorney appointed by relator to supervise his compliance with the Disciplinary Rules. Costs taxed to respondent.

Judgment accordingly.

Douglas, Resnick, F.E. Sweeney and Pfeifer, JJ., concur.

Moyer, C.J., Wright and Cook, JJ., dissent.

Cook, J.,

dissenting. I respectfully dissent. Respondent’s breach of his client’s trust by loaning himself $3,000 from the client’s funds, then lying when questioned by the client, and still failing to conclude the transaction until the client filed a grievance, warrants a full one-year suspension from the privilege of practicing our profession.

Moyer, C.J., and Wright, J., concur in the foregoing dissenting opinion.