Case ID: ohio-st-3d_96/html/0158-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "Per Curiam. Alice Robie Resnick, J.,", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

In re Application of John Doe II.
    [Cite as In re Application of John Doe II, 96 Ohio St.3d 158, 2002-0hio-3609.]
    (No. 2002-0494
    Submitted May 22, 2002
    Decided July 31, 2002.)
   Per Curiam.

{¶ 1} The Board of Commissioners on Character and Fitness of the Supreme Court has recommended that the applicant, John Doe II, not be approved for admission to the practice of law in Ohio based on his current application, but that he be permitted to reapply to take the July 2002 bar exam and that he be required to submit medical evidence substantiating his sustained psychological well-being. We agree that Doe’s application should be denied now, but we require a longer waiting period to allow us to evaluate his ability to maintain the medication regimen and health necessary for the regulation of his bipolar disorder. Accordingly, we deny Doe’s application for admission to the bar and grant him permission to reapply for the bar exam in February 2003. We further order that the record of proceedings in this case be sealed.

John Doe II, pro se.

Robert E. Sweeney Co., L.P.A., and John L. Goodman, for Joint Admissions Committee of the Cleveland/Cuyahoga County Bar Association.

Judgment accordingly.

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

Resnick and Lundberg Stratton, JJ., concur in part and dissent in part.

Alice Robie Resnick, J.,

concurring in part and dissenting in part.

{¶ 2} I agree with the majority that the applicant should be permitted to reapply for the February 2003 bar examination. However, I disagree with the majority’s decision to order that the record of proceedings in this case be sealed, since all matters of this nature should be open to the public.

Lundberg Stratton, J., concurs in the foregoing opinion.