Ohio Supreme Court

Cincinnati Bar Ass'n v. Bortz

658 N.E.2d 252 · 74 Ohio St. 3d 207

January 10, 1996 · Docket No. 95-1669

Queued for AI processing — next in lineest. ~180 min

Opinion

Per Curiam.

Upon review of the record, we concur in the board’s finding of misconduct and its recommendation. Respondent is therefore publicly reprimanded for his violation of DR 5-101(A). Costs taxed to respondent.

Judgment accordingly.

Moyer, C.J., Douglas, Resnick, F.E. Sweeney, Pfeifer and Cook, JJ., concur. Wright, J., dissents.