Cincinnati Bar Ass'n v. Wolosin, 704 N.E.2d 566 (Ohio 1999). · Go Syfert
Search
Cincinnati Bar Ass'n v. Wolosin, 704 N.E.2d 566 (Ohio 1999). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
12 citation events (4 in the last 25 years) across 1 distinct court.
Strongest positive: Columbus Bar Assn. v. Foster (ohio, 2001-07-18)
Top citers, strongest first. 4 distinct citers. How cited ↗
discussed Cited "see, e.g." Columbus Bar Assn. v. Foster (2×)
Ohio · 2001 · signal: see also · confidence low
See, also, Cincinnati Bar Assn. v. Wolosin (1999), 84 Ohio St.3d 401 , 704 N.E.2d 566 , and Disciplinary Counsel v. Dahling (2000), 90 Ohio St.3d 246 , 737 N.E.2d 25 , where the orders we issued disbarring attorneys were based in large part on their neglect of bankruptcy cases.
discussed Cited "see, e.g." Columbus Bar Ass'n v. Foster (2×)
Ohio · 2001 · signal: see also · confidence low
See, also, Cincinnati Bar Assn. v. Wolosin (1999), 84 Ohio St.3d 401 , 704 N.E.2d 566 , and Disciplinary Counsel v. Dahling (2000), 90 Ohio St.3d 246 , 737 N.E.2d 25 , where the orders we issued disbarring attorneys were based in large part on their neglect of bankruptcy cases.
discussed Cited "see, e.g." Cincinnati Bar Assn. v. Reis (2×)
Ohio · 1999 · signal: see, e.g. · confidence low
See, e.g., Cincinnati Bar Assn. v. Wolosin (1999), 84 Ohio St.3d 401, 402 , 704 N.E.2d 566, 568 .
discussed Cited "see, e.g." Cincinnati Bar Ass'n v. Reis (2×)
Ohio · 1999 · signal: see, e.g. · confidence low
See, e.g., Cincinnati Bar Assn. v. Wolosin (1999), 84 Ohio St.3d 401, 402 , 704 N.E.2d 566, 568 .
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Cincinnati Bar Association
v.
Wolosin
No. 98-1742.
Ohio Supreme Court.
Jan 20, 1999.
704 N.E.2d 566
Thomas R. Smith, David C. Wagner and Edwin W. Patterson III, for relator.
Cook, Douglas, Moyer, Pfeifer, Resnick, Stratton, Sweeney.
Cited by 6 opinions  |  Published
Per Curiam.

We adopt the findings, conclusions, and recommendation of the board. Absent any mitigating circumstances, appropriation of client funds and a pattern of neglecting client interests warrant disbarment. Cleveland Bar Assn. v. Armon (1997), 78 Ohio St.3d 497, 499-500, 678 N.E.2d 1371, 1373. Given the number of these incidents, the lack of any mitigating evidence, as well as respondent’s failure to comply with our suspension order and cooperate in the disciplinary investigation, disbarment is the only appropriate sanction here. Respondent is hereby permanently disbarred from the practice of law in Ohio. Costs taxed to respondent.

Judgment accordingly.

Moyer, C.J., Douglas, Resnick, F.E. Sweeney, Pfeifer, Cook and Lundberg Stratton, JJ., concur.