Case Name: Cleveland Bar Association v. Droe
Court: Supreme Court of Ohio
Jurisdiction: Ohio
Decision Date: 1998-12-02
Citations: 84 Ohio St. 3d 143
Docket Number: No. 98-1231
Parties: Cleveland Bar Association v. Droe.
Judges: Moyer, C.J., Douglas, Resnick, F.E. Sweeney, Pfeifer and Lundberg Stratton, JJ., concur.
Reporter: Ohio State Reports, Third Service
Volume: 84
Pages: 143–146

Head Matter:
Cleveland Bar Association v. Droe.
[Cite as Cleveland Bar Assn. v. Droe (1998), 84 Ohio St.3d 143.]
(No. 98-1231
Submitted August 19, 1998
Decided December 2, 1998.)
Brian P. Downey and Timothy J. Fitzgerald, for relator.
William G. Droe, pro se.

Opinion:
Per Curiam.
After review, we concur with the findings, conclusions, and recommendation of the board. Earlier in Droe I, we noted that "if an attorney expects to remain on the rolls of those permitted to practice law in this state, he must demonstrate respect for his clients." Droe I, 77 Ohio St.3d at 90, 671 N.E.2d at 231. As the stipulations show, respondent demonstrated repeated misconduct and neglect as well as failure to respect his clients.
Respondent's earlier actions occurred in 1984 and 1990 and resulted in Droe I. His misconduct here began in 1990 and extended through 1996. We are satisfied that respondent's continued misconduct involving dishonesty, fraud, deceit, and misrepresentation, as well as his neglect of his clients' legal matters, warrants an indefinite suspension from the practice of law. See Cleveland Bar Assn. v. Rea (1997), 78 Ohio St.3d 71, 676 N.E.2d 514; Cleveland Bar Assn. v. Kaigler (1991), 57 Ohio St.3d 197, 566 N.E.2d 673. Accordingly, 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 and Lundberg Stratton, JJ., concur.
Cook, J., dissents.