Case ID: ohio-st-3d_71/html/0283-01.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

Dayton Bar Association v. Rogers.
    [Cite as Dayton Bar Assn. v. Rogers (1994), 71 Ohio St.3d 288.]
    (No. 94-1815
    Submitted October 11, 1994
    Decided December 21, 1994.)
    
      
      Altick & Corwin and Dennis J. Adkins, for relator.
    
      Flanagan, Lieberman, Hoffman & Swaim and Bradley C. Smith, for respondent.
   Per Curiam.

Having thoroughly reviewed the record, we agree with the board’s findings of misconduct and its recommendation. Richard H. Rogers is publicly reprimanded for having violated DR 1-102(A)(3) and (4). Costs taxed to respondent.

Judgment accordingly.

Moyer, C.J., A.W. Sweeney, Douglas, Wright, Resnick and F.E. Sweeney, JJ., concur.

Pfeifer, J., dissents and would dismiss the cause.