Case Name: Office of Disciplinary Counsel v. Saumer
Court: Supreme Court of Ohio
Jurisdiction: Ohio
Decision Date: 1999-08-25
Citations: 86 Ohio St. 3d 312
Docket Number: No. 99-832
Parties: Office of Disciplinary Counsel v. Saumer.
Judges: Moyer, C.J., Douglas, Resnick, F.E. Sweeney, Pfeifer, Cook and Lundberg Stratton, JJ., concur.
Reporter: Ohio State Reports, Third Service
Volume: 86
Pages: 312–314

Head Matter:
Office of Disciplinary Counsel v. Saumer.
[Cite as Disciplinary Counsel v. Saumer (1999), 86 Ohio St.3d 312.]
(No. 99-832
Submitted June 9, 1999
Decided August 25, 1999.)
Jonathan E. Coughlan, Disciplinary Counsel, and John K. McManus, Assistant Disciplinary Counsel, for relator.

Opinion:
Per Curiam.
We adopt the findings, conclusions, and recommendation of the board. Generally, neglect of legal matters and a failure to cooperate in the ensuing investigation warrant an indefinite suspension. Cleveland Bar Assn. v. Rollins (1999), 84 Ohio St.3d 408, 410, 704 N.E.2d 1210, 1211. There are no circumstances that require a departure from the foregoing rule in this case. As the board concluded, respondent's concealment of assets, neglect, and abandonment of the estate case compounded by his total lack of cooperation with and respect for the disciplinary process require an indefinite suspension. Respondent is hereby indefinitely suspended 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.