Case ID: ohio-st-3d_52/html/0262-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "\n      Per Curiam.\n     Alice Robie Resnick, J.,", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Akron Bar Association v. Parker.
    [Cite as Akron Bar Assn. v. Parker (1990), 52 Ohio St. 3d 262.]
    (No. 89-1874
    Submitted March 7, 1990
    Decided July 18, 1990.)
    
      
      Peter T. Cahoon, Vincent J.Alfera, Stephen A. Fallis and James L. Wagner, for relator.
    
      Thompson, Hiñe & Flory, Richard E. Guster; and Charles W. Kettlewell, for respondent.
   Per Curiam.

We agree that respondent committed the misconduct found by the board. However, our review of the record and the arguments submitted by the parties convinces us that a lesser penalty is warranted by this case. Accordingly, respondent is hereby suspended from the practice of law in Ohio for a period of one year. Costs taxed to respondent.

Judgment accordingly.

Moyer, C.J., Holmes, Douglas and Wright, JJ., concur.

Koehler, H. Brown and Re snick, JJ., dissent.

Richard H. Koehler, J., of the Twelfth Appellate District, sitting for Sweeney, J.

Alice Robie Resnick, J.,

dissenting. After a review of the record in this matter, I would not find misconduct as to Count One. I would, however, find misconduct as to Count Two. Based upon the respondent’s professional history, a public reprimand would be more appropriate.

Koehler and H. Brown, JJ., concur in the foregoing dissenting opinion.