You are viewing a free summary from Descrybe.ai. For citation checking, legal issue analysis, and other advanced tools, explore our Legal Research Toolkit — not free, but close.

Office of Disciplinary Counsel v. West

Citations: 85 Ohio St. 3d 5; 706 N.E.2d 760; 1999 Ohio LEXIS 540Docket: No. 98-2262

Court: Ohio Supreme Court; March 2, 1999; Ohio; State Supreme Court

Narrative Opinion Summary

The findings of fact and conclusions of law from the board are adopted. An attorney's adherence to the law and respect for judicial officers is essential for maintaining the right to practice law in Ohio. Public criticism of a judge must be made with certainty of merit, appropriate language, and without petty remarks to preserve public confidence in the legal system. The respondent's knowingly false accusation against a judge breached DR 8-102(B), undermining judicial integrity. Consequently, an eighteen-month suspension from practicing law in Ohio is imposed, with twelve months stayed contingent upon the respondent's continued psychiatric treatment and compliance with monitoring by the Columbus Bar Association. Prior to resuming practice, the respondent must provide evidence of the capability to practice law effectively. Costs are assigned to the respondent. The judgment is supported by the Chief Justice and several justices, with one justice not participating.

Legal Issues Addressed

Assignment of Costs in Disciplinary Proceedings

Application: Costs of the disciplinary proceedings are assigned to the respondent as part of the sanctions.

Reasoning: Costs are assigned to the respondent.

Attorney Conduct and Adherence to Law

Application: An attorney must demonstrate adherence to the law and respect for judicial officers to maintain their right to practice law.

Reasoning: An attorney's adherence to the law and respect for judicial officers is essential for maintaining the right to practice law in Ohio.

Disciplinary Rule 8-102(B) Violation

Application: Knowingly making false accusations against a judge constitutes a violation of DR 8-102(B) and undermines judicial integrity.

Reasoning: The respondent's knowingly false accusation against a judge breached DR 8-102(B), undermining judicial integrity.

Public Criticism of Judicial Officers

Application: Criticism of judges by attorneys must be made with certainty of merit, using appropriate language, and avoiding petty remarks to maintain public confidence in the legal system.

Reasoning: Public criticism of a judge must be made with certainty of merit, appropriate language, and without petty remarks to preserve public confidence in the legal system.

Reinstatement Conditions

Application: Before resuming practice, an attorney must provide evidence of their capability to practice law effectively after suspension for misconduct.

Reasoning: Prior to resuming practice, the respondent must provide evidence of the capability to practice law effectively.

Sanctions for Professional Misconduct

Application: An eighteen-month suspension from practicing law is imposed for misconduct, with conditions for a stay of part of the suspension based on psychiatric treatment and compliance monitoring.

Reasoning: Consequently, an eighteen-month suspension from practicing law in Ohio is imposed, with twelve months stayed contingent upon the respondent's continued psychiatric treatment and compliance with monitoring by the Columbus Bar Association.