Case ID: ohio-st-3d_86/html/0038-01.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

Cuyahoga County Bar Association v. Bogart.
    [Cite as Cuyahoga Cty. Bar Assn. v. Bogart (1999), 86 Ohio St.3d 38.]
    (No. 99-388
    Submitted April 14, 1999
    Decided June 23, 1999.)
    
      
      Charles Scott Rawlings, Jon F. Deegan and Earl Williams, Jr., for relator.
    
      Bruce P. Bogart, pro se.
    
   Per Curiam.

We adopt the findings, conclusions, and recommendation of the board. A stayed suspension with the conditions recommended by the board is an appropriate sanction for respondent’s misconduct and will assure that he receives the assistance necessary to treat his alcohol addiction and related dependency problems. See, e.g., Disciplinary Counsel v. Maxwell (1998), 83 Ohio St.3d 7, 697 N.E.2d 597, and Cincinnati Bar Assn. v. Baas (1997), 79 Ohio St.3d 293, 681 N.E.2d 421, where we imposed similar sanctions for misconduct that included violations of DR 1-102(A)(6) and evidence of alcohol abuse. Accordingly, respondent is hereby suspended from the practice of law in Ohio for eighteen months, with the entire suspension stayed and respondent placed on probation under the conditions established by the board. Costs taxed to respondent.

Judgment accordingly.

Moyer, C.J., Douglas, Resnick, F.E. Sweeney, Pfeifer, Cook and Lundberg Stratton, JJ., concur.