Login
  • Bookmark
  • PDF
  • Share
  • CaseIQ

DISCIPLINARY COUNSEL v. WILLIAMS

Supreme Court of Ohio.
May 9, 1990
Important Paras
Please sign up to view Important Paras.

Attorneys at law — Misconduct — Public reprimand — Acquiring a proprietary interest in a matter undertaken for a client, accepting compensation from one other than a client and engaging in conduct prejudicial to the administration of justice.

Per Curiam.

Having thoroughly reviewed the record, we agree with the board's findings of misconduct and its recommendation. Accordingly, respondent is hereby publicly reprimanded for having violated DR 5-103(A), 5-107(A)(1), and 1-102(A)(5). Costs taxed to respondent.

Judgment accordingly.

MOYER, C.J., SWEENEY, HOLMES, DOUGLAS, WRIGHT, H. BROWN and RESNICK, JJ., concur.