Source: http://ohiolawinfo.blogspot.com/2005_08_14_archive.html
Timestamp: 2019-04-23 10:49:39+00:00

Document:
2004-1808. Columbus Bar Assn. v. Halliburton-Cohen, 2005-Ohio-3956.
On Certified Report by the Board of Commissioners on Grievances and Discipline, No. 03-113. Kim M. Halliburton-Cohen, Attorney Registration No. 0023389, is suspended from the practice of law in Ohio for six months, stayed on conditions.
2004-2141. Cuyahoga Cty. Bar Assn. v. King, 2005-Ohio-3955.
On Certified Report by the Board of Commissioners on Grievances and Discipline, No. 03-116. Michael Leonard King, Attorney Registration No. 0031364, is indefinitely suspended from the practice of law in Ohio.
2004-2146. Cleveland Bar Assn. v. McKissic, 2005-Ohio-3954.
On Final Report by the Board on the Unauthorized Practice of Law, No. UPL 03-11. Velma McKissic is enjoined from conduct that constitutes the unauthorized practice of law.
2004-2157. Disciplinary Counsel v. White, 2005-Ohio-3957.
On Certified Report by the Board of Commissioners on Grievances and Discipline, No. 04-035. David Lee White II, Attorney Registration No. 0030927, is indefinitely suspended from the practice of law in Ohio.
On August 11, 2005, the First Circuit issued its en banc decision in U.S. v. Councilman, 2005 WL 1907528 (1st Cir. Aug. 11, 2005), where it held that interception of e-mail while on its way to the recipient violated the Electronic Communications Privacy Act. This case lends strength to the position of those who believe that attorneys may use e-mail without encryption.
2003-P-1451 William S. and Sandra M. Dehner v. Hamilton County Board of Revision, Hamilton County Auditor and the Northwest Local School District Board of Education. Real Property Tax. Vacated and Remanded. Board members concur.
2004-M-40 State Street Bank - Trust Co. of Connecticut NA et al. v. Montgomery County Board of Revision, the Montgomery County Auditor and Northmont City Schools Board of Education. Real Property Tax. Value found. Board members concur.
2004-M-143 First Baptist Church of Milford v. J. Patrick McAndrew, Tax Commissioner of Ohio. Real Property Tax Exemption. Tax Commissioner affirmed. Board members concur.
2004-V-507 Jefferson Area Local School District Board of Education v. Ashtabula County Board of Revision, Ashtabula County Auditor, and First States Investors, 2550A, LLC. Real Property Tax. Value found. Board members concur.
2004-G-644 John C. Conkle v. Coshocton County Board of Revision and Coshocton County Auditor. Real Property Tax. Remanded. Board members concur.
2004-M-792 Parmalat Bakery Group aka Archway Cookies, Inc. v. Ashland County Board of Revision, the Ashland County Auditor and the Ashland City School District Board of Education. Real Property Tax. Value found. Board members concur.
2004-V-885 Perry Local School District Board of Education v. Stark County Board of Revision, Stark County Auditor, and 1515 Management Company Inc. Real Property Tax. Value found. Board members concur.
2004-A-1205, 2004-A-1206 Planet Investment Corp. v. Franklin County Board of Revision, Franklin County Auditor, and the Board of Education of the Plain Local Schools District. Real Property Tax. Value found. Board members concur.
2005-M-178 Board of Education of the Rocky River Schools v. Cuyahoga County Board of Revision, the Cuyahoga County Auditor, and Kensington Club Limited Partnership. Real Property Tax. Vacated. Board members concur.
SYLLABUS: A lawyer or law firm should not participate in a local television station’s advertising and public service program if entitled “Ask the Expert.” The program name, not the program itself, is objectionable under the disciplinary rules. Lawyers may not hold themselves out as experts. If a television station’s advertising and public service program is properly titled, the lawyer’s participation is proper so long as the lawyer is able to comply with his or her ethical duties under the Ohio Code of Professional Conduct.
SYLLABUS: It is proper for attorneys to volunteer in a bar association sponsored program providing public education and pro bono legal services regarding advance directive forms. The term “advance directive” refers to living will, health-care power of attorney, and anatomical gift forms, and to mental health declarations. Such efforts by the bar association and the volunteer attorneys help educate the public and provide access for individuals without means to afford such legal assistance.
Whether it is proper for individual lawyers or law firms, acting on their own and not through a proper auspice such as a bar association, to provide public education and pro bono legal services regarding advance directive forms depends upon the facts and circumstances. The propriety is determined by the purpose and the conduct. It would be proper if the lawyer’s or law firm’s purpose is to provide needed public education and pro bono legal services and there is no improper solicitation of legal business. It would be improper if the purpose and modus operandi is in-person solicitation of legal business.
SYLLABUS: In the absence of an express ethical or statutory restriction, a retired judge who engages in the practice of law may also serve as a private judge pursuant to R.C. § 2701.10. To avoid an appearance of impropriety, a retired judge should not practice law in the court in which he or she frequently accepts referrals as a private judge and should not act as a lawyer in any proceeding in which he or she served as a private judge or in any related proceeding.

References: v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 § 2701