Case Name: Office of Disciplinary Counsel v. Doan
Court: Supreme Court of Ohio
Jurisdiction: Ohio
Decision Date: 1997-01-15
Citations: 77 Ohio St. 3d 236
Docket Number: No. 96-1297
Parties: Office of Disciplinary Counsel v. Doan.
Judges: Moyer, C.J., Douglas, Resnick, F.E. Sweeney, Pfeifer, Cook and Stratton, JJ., concur.
Reporter: Ohio State Reports, Third Service
Volume: 77
Pages: 236–237

Head Matter:
Office of Disciplinary Counsel v. Doan.
[Cite as Disciplinary Counsel v. Doan (1997), 77 Ohio St.3d 236.]
(No. 96-1297
Submitted September 10, 1996
Decided January 15, 1997.)
Geoffrey Stem, Disciplinary Counsel, and Sally Ann Steuk, Assistant Disciplinary Counsel, for relator.
Joseph G. Carr, for respondent.

Opinion:
Per Curiam.
In Land Title Abstract & Trust Co. v. Dworken (1934), 129 Ohio St. 23, 1 O.O. 313, 193 N.E. 650, we made clear that the practice of law embraces the preparation of legal documents on another's behalf, including deeds which convey real property. We adopt the board's findings and conclusion, and further find that respondent had not registered for corporate status under Gov. Bar R. VI(4)(A). Based on the facts in this case we find that respondent engaged in the unauthorized practice of law.
Pursuant to Gov. Bar R. VH(19)(D), respondent is hereby prohibited from engaging in any such conduct in the future and is charged with all the costs and expenses of this proceeding.
Judgment accordingly.
Moyer, C.J., Douglas, Resnick, F.E. Sweeney, Pfeifer, Cook and Stratton, JJ., concur.