Court Opinion

ID: 4018507
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2016-07-25 13:09:10.150862+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T12:18:51.352600
License: Public Domain

[Cite as Disciplinary Counsel v. Hale, ___ Ohio St.3d ___, 2016-Ohio-____.]

                           DISCIPLINARY COUNSEL v. HALE.
 [Cite as Disciplinary Counsel v. Hale, ___ Ohio St.3d ___, 2016-Ohio-5079.]
       (No. 2013-1622—Submitted July 21, 2016—Decided July 25, 2016.)
                        ON APPLICATION FOR REINSTATEMENT.
                                ____________________
        {¶ 1} This cause came on for further consideration upon the filing of an
application for reinstatement by respondent, Harland Hanna Hale, Attorney
Registration No. 0023464, last known business address in Columbus, Ohio.
        {¶ 2} The court coming now to consider its order of November 18, 2014,
wherein the court, pursuant to former Gov.Bar R. V(6)(B)(3), suspended
respondent from the practice of law for a period of six months, finds that
respondent has substantially complied with that order and with the provisions of
Gov.Bar R. V(24).
        {¶ 3} Therefore, it is ordered by this court that respondent is reinstated to
the practice of law in the state of Ohio.
        {¶ 4} It is further ordered that the clerk of this court issue certified copies
of this order as provided for in Gov.Bar R. V(17)(D)(1) and that publication be
made as provided for in Gov.Bar R. V(17)(D)(2).
        {¶ 5} For earlier case, see Disciplinary Counsel v. Hale, 141 Ohio St. 3d
518, 2014-Ohio-5053, 26 N.E.3d 785.
        O’CONNOR, C.J., and PFEIFER, O’DONNELL, LANZINGER, KENNEDY,
FRENCH, and O’NEILL, JJ., concur.
                             ________________________