Case Name: Office of Disciplinary Counsel v. Wise
Court: Supreme Court of Ohio
Jurisdiction: Ohio
Decision Date: 1999-03-24
Citations: 85 Ohio St. 3d 169
Docket Number: No. 98-2213
Parties: Office of Disciplinary Counsel v. Wise.
Judges: Moyer, C.J., Douglas, Resnick, F.E. Sweeney, Pfeifer, Cook and Lundberg Stratton, JJ., concur.
Reporter: Ohio State Reports, Third Service
Volume: 85
Pages: 169–171

Head Matter:
Office of Disciplinary Counsel v. Wise.
[Cite as Disciplinary Counsel v. Wise (1999), 85 Ohio St.3d 169.]
(No. 98-2213
Submitted December 16, 1998
Decided March 24, 1999.)
Jonathan E. Coughlan, Disciplinary Counsel, and Lori J. Brown, First Assistant Disciplinary Counsel, for relator.
J. Gerald Ingram, for respondent.

Opinion:
Per Curiam.
The normal sanction for misappropriation of client funds is disbarment. Disciplinary Counsel v. Connaughton (1996), 75 Ohio St.3d 644, 645, 665 N.E.2d 675, 676, and cases cited therein. However, on some occasions because of mitigating circumstances, we have given weight to a board recommendation of a lesser sanction. Disciplinary Counsel v. Kurtz (1998), 82 Ohio St.3d 55, 693 N.E.2d 1080. We do so in this case. Respondent is hereby indefinitely suspended from the practice of law in Ohio. Costs are taxed to respondent.
Judgment accordingly.
Moyer, C.J., Douglas, Resnick, F.E. Sweeney, Pfeifer, Cook and Lundberg Stratton, JJ., concur.