Case Name: Dayton Bar Association v. Buren
Court: Supreme Court of Ohio
Jurisdiction: Ohio
Decision Date: 1998-12-30
Citations: 84 Ohio St. 3d 271
Docket Number: No. 98-1729
Parties: Dayton Bar Association v. Buren.
Judges: Moyer, C.J., Douglas, Resnick, F.E. Sweeney, Pfeifer, Cook and Lundberg Stratton, JJ., concur.
Reporter: Ohio State Reports, Third Service
Volume: 84
Pages: 271–274

Head Matter:
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.

Opinion:
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.