Case Name: Disciplinary Counsel v. Edelman
Court: Supreme Court of Ohio
Jurisdiction: Ohio
Decision Date: 2005-05-05
Citations: 105 Ohio St. 3d 1258
Docket Number: No. 2005-0458
Parties: Disciplinary Counsel v. Edelman.
Judges: Moyer, C.J., Resnick, Pfeifer, Lundberg Stratton, O’Connor, O’Donnell and Lanzinger, JJ., concur.
Reporter: Ohio State Reports, Third Service
Volume: 105
Pages: 1258–1259

Head Matter:
Disciplinary Counsel v. Edelman.
[Cite as Disciplinary Counsel v. Edelman, 105 Ohio St.3d 1258, 2005-Ohio-2421.]
(No. 2005-0458
Submitted April 28, 2005
Decided May 5, 2005.)

Opinion:
{¶ 1} This cause is pending before the Supreme Court of Ohio in accordance with the reciprocal discipline provisions of Gov.Bar R. V(11)(F).
{¶ 2} On March 9, 2005, relator, Disciplinary Counsel, filed with this court a certified copy of an order of the Supreme Court of Arizona entered December 29, 2004, in In the Matter of a Member of the State Bar of Arizona, Sanford J. Edelman, in Case No. SB04-0152-D, censuring respondent. On March 22, 2005, this court ordered respondent to show cause why identical or comparable discipline should not be imposed in this state. Respondent filed no response to the show cause order. This cause was considered by the court and on consideration thereof,
{¶ 3} IT IS ORDERED AND ADJUDGED by this court that pursuant to Gov.Bar R. V(11)(F)(4), respondent, Sanford J. Edelman, Attorney Registration No. 0011572, last known business address in Sierra Vista, Arizona, be publicly reprimanded.
{¶ 4} IT IS FURTHER ORDERED, sua sponte, by the court that, within 90 days of the date of this order, respondent shall reimburse any amounts that have been awarded against the respondent by the Clients' Security Fund pursuant to Gov.Bar R. VIII(7)(F). It is further ordered, sua sponte, by the court that if, after the date of this order, the Clients' Security Fund awards any amount against the respondent pursuant to Gov.Bar R. VIII(7)(F), the respondent shall reimburse that amount to the Clients' Security Fund within 90 days of the notice of such award.
{¶ 5} IT IS FURTHER ORDERED, sua sponte, that all documents filed with this court in this case shall meet the filing requirements set forth in the Rules of Practice of the Supreme Court of Ohio, including requirements as to form, number, and timeliness of filings.
{¶ 6} IT IS FURTHER ORDERED, sua sponte, that service shall be deemed made on respondent by sending this order, and all other orders in this case, by certified mail to the most recent address respondent has given to the Attorney Registration Section.
{¶ 7} IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Clerk of this court issue certified copies of this order as provided for in Gov.Bar R. V(8)(D)(1), that publication be made as provided for in Gov.Bar R. V(8)(D)(2), and that respondent bear the costs of publication.
Moyer, C.J., Resnick, Pfeifer, Lundberg Stratton, O'Connor, O'Donnell and Lanzinger, JJ., concur.