Case Name: Office of Disciplinary Counsel v. Jones
Court: Supreme Court of Ohio
Jurisdiction: Ohio
Decision Date: 2000-10-25
Citations: 90 Ohio St. 3d 244
Docket Number: No. DD 87-33
Parties: Office of Disciplinary Counsel v. Jones.
Judges: Douglas, Resnick, F.E. Sweeney and Lundberg Stratton, JJ., concur.
Reporter: Ohio State Reports, Third Service
Volume: 90
Pages: 244–246

Head Matter:
Office of Disciplinary Counsel v. Jones.
[Cite as Disciplinary Counsel v. Jones (2000), 90 Ohio St.3d 244.]
(No. DD 87-33
Submitted July 6, 2000
Decided October 25, 2000.)
Jonathan Coughlan, Disciplinary Counsel, and Kevin L. Williams, Assistant Disciplinary Counsel, for relator.
Britz & Zemmelman and Harland M. Britz, for respondent.

Opinion:
Per Curiam.
Respondent has been suspended from the practice of law since 1985, including an automatic indefinite suspension based on a criminal conviction. Although the record at the panel hearing shows that on occasion respondent used drugs after his suspension, it also shows that he has been free from drug use for the past two years. Respondent presented exhibits to support his contention that he was a talented and successful lawyer prior to 1987 and that he has completed the requisite number of hours of continuing legal education for his reinstatement. Respondent also stated that he intended to resume AA meetings, which he had discontinued approximately eleven weeks before the panel hearing.
Having reviewed the record, we find that it has now been over fifteen years since respondent committed the acts for which he was suspended, that respondent is more mature, that he recognizes his problem, and that he is likely to avoid relapses in the future. We therefore conclude that the respondent ought to be and he hereby is reinstated to the practice of law in Ohio. Costs are taxed to respondent.
Judgment accordingly.
Douglas, Resnick, F.E. Sweeney and Lundberg Stratton, JJ., concur.
Moyer, C.J., and Cook, J., concur in part and dissent in part.
Pfeifer, J., dissents.