Case Title: In re Continuing Legal Edn. Suspension of Pringle

Citation: 2013-Ohio-3169

Docket Number: 1995-31357

State: ohio

Court: Ohio Supreme Court

Date: 2013-07-22T00:00:00Z

Document:
[Cite as In re Continuing Legal Edn. Suspension of Pringle, ___ Ohio St.3d ___, 2013-Ohio-
3169.] 
 
 
IN RE CONTINUING LEGAL EDUCATION SUSPENSION OF PRINGLE. 
 [Cite as In re Continuing Legal Edn. Suspension of Pringle, 
 ___ Ohio St.3d ___, 2013-Ohio-3169.] 
(No. CLE-1995-31357—Submitted May 15, 2013—Decided July 22 2013.) 
ON REPORT OF THE COMMISSION ON CONTINUING LEGAL EDUCATION. 
____________________ 
{¶ 1} This matter originated in this court on the filing of a report by the 
Commission on Continuing Legal Education pursuant to Gov.Bar R. 
X(6)(A)(1)(b) and (A)(2)(d).  The commission recommended the imposition of 
sanctions against certain attorneys, including the above-named respondent, for 
failure to comply with the provisions of Gov.Bar R. X, Attorney Continuing 
Legal Education, for the 1993-1994 reporting period. 
{¶ 2} On  August 12, 1996, this court adopted the recommendation of the 
commission, imposed a sanction fee upon respondent, and suspended respondent 
from the practice of law pursuant to Gov.Bar R. X(6)(B)(3) and (5)(A)(4).  The 
court further ordered that respondent shall not be reinstated to the practice of law 
in Ohio until respondent complies with the requirements for reinstatement set 
forth in Gov.Bar R. X(7), respondent complies with the Supreme Court Rules for 
the Government of the Bar of Ohio, respondent complies with this and all other 
orders of the court, and this court orders respondent reinstated. 
{¶ 3} On May 6, 2013, the commission filed a recommendation pursuant 
to Gov.Bar R. X(7)(B)(2), finding that respondent has paid all fees assessed for 
noncompliance, has made up all deficiencies, and is now in full compliance with 
all requirements of Gov.Bar R. X and recommending that respondent be 
reinstated to the practice of law in Ohio.  The commission certified that 
respondent had completed the credit hours of continuing legal education required 
SUPREME COURT OF OHIO 
2 
 
during the suspension by this court’s order of suspension.  Respondent has 
satisfied all the requirements of this court’s order of suspension. 
{¶ 4} Upon consideration thereof, it is ordered by the court that the 
recommendation of the commission is adopted and respondent, Elbert Roy 
Pringle, is hereby reinstated to the practice of law. 
O’CONNOR, C.J., and PFEIFER, O’DONNELL, LANZINGER, KENNEDY, 
FRENCH, and O’NEILL, JJ., concur. 
________________________