Case ID: ohio-st-3d_84/html/0271-01.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. Buren.
    [Cite as Dayton Bar Assn. v. Burén (1998), 84 Ohio St.3d 271.]
    (No. 98-1729
    Submitted September 29, 1998
    Decided December 30, 1998.)
    
      
      Certo & Larson and Peter R. Certo, Jr., for relator.
   Per Curiam.

We concur with the findings, conclusions, and recommendation of the board. Burén engaged in a continuing course of deceit, misrepresentation, and neglect of duty to his clients and the bankruptcy court. In addition, Burén has failed to cooperate with disciplinary proceedings. Under these circumstances, disbarment is the appropriate sanction. See, e.g., Cuyahoga Cty. Bar Assn. v. Churilla (1997), 78 Ohio St.3d 348, 350, 678 N.E.2d 515, 516-517; Cincinnati Bar Assn. v. Brown (1997), 78 Ohio St.3d 345, 678 N.E.2d 513. Buren is hereby disbarred from the practice of law in Ohio. Costs taxed to respondent.

Judgment accordingly.

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