Court Opinion

ID: 4036000
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2016-09-22 13:10:50.171571+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T13:23:49.029839
License: Public Domain

[Cite as Disciplinary Counsel v. Ford, 2016-Ohio-5914.]

                           DISCIPLINARY COUNSEL v. FORD.
 [Cite as Disciplinary Counsel v. Ford, ___ Ohio St.3d ___, 2016-Ohio-5914.]
(No. 2011-2042—Submitted September 16, 2016—Decided September 22, 2016.)
                        ON APPLICATION FOR REINSTATEMENT.
                                ____________________
        {¶ 1} This cause came on for further consideration upon the filing of an
application for reinstatement by respondent, George Cook Ford III, Attorney
Registration No. 0011982, last known address in Norwalk, Ohio.
        {¶ 2} The court coming now to consider its order of September 5, 2012,
wherein the court, pursuant to former Gov.Bar R. V(6)(B)(3), suspended
respondent from the practice of law for a period of two years with six months stayed
on conditions, 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. Ford, 133 Ohio St.3d
105, 2012-Ohio-3915, 976 N.E.2d 846.
        O’CONNOR, C.J., and PFEIFER, O’DONNELL, LANZINGER, KENNEDY,
FRENCH, and O’NEILL, JJ., concur.
                             ________________________