COLUMBUS BAR ASSN. v. EWING

No. 95-801.

75 Ohio St.3d 244 (1996)

COLUMBUS BAR ASSOCIATION v. EWING

Supreme Court of Ohio.

Decided March 6, 1996.


Attorney(s) appearing for the Case

Bloomfield & Kempf and David S. Bloomfield; Michael Distelhorst, Ronald L. Redmon and Bruce A. Campbell, Bar Counsel, for relator.

Charles W. Ewing, pro se; Lucas, Prendergast, Albright, Gibson & Newman and Rankin M. Gibson, for respondent.


Per Curiam.

In his objections to the board's report, respondent argues that the evidence did not establish the charged violations of DR 1-101(A), 1-102(A)(4), 1-102(A)(6), 5-101(A), 5-105(A), 5-105(B), and 6-102(A). With respect to Count One, respondent asserts that the suspension of his real estate sales license did not result from any "proceedings" referred to in the bar application. We reject this argument because Question 12(a) in the application unmistakably...

Let's get started

Leagle.com

Welcome to the leading source of independent legal reporting
Sign on now to see your case.
Or view more than 10 million decisions and orders.

  • Updated daily.
  • Uncompromising quality.
  • Complete, Accurate, Current.

Listed below are the cases that are cited in this Featured Case. Click the citation to see the full text of the cited case. Citations are also linked in the body of the Featured Case.

Cited Cases

  • No Cases Found

Listed below are those cases in which this Featured Case is cited. Click on the case name to see the full text of the citing case.

Citing Cases