Ohio Law

News and Announcements from the Supreme Court of Ohio and Other Governmental Entities Within the Buckeye State.

Tuesday, May 23, 2006

5/23/2006 - Supreme Court of Ohio Case Announcements

MOTION AND PROCEDURAL RULINGS

2005-2084. Knust v. Wilkins.
Board of Tax Appeals, No. 2004-M-533. This cause is pending before the
court as an appeal from the Board of Tax Appeals. Upon consideration of
the motion of amici curiae, Rome P. Busa Jr. and Anthony J. Busa,
requesting leave to participate in oral argument,
IT IS ORDERED by the court that the motion is denied.

2006-0891. Brown v. State.
Lucas App. No. L-05-1050, 2006-Ohio-1393. This cause is pending before
the court as a discretionary appeal and claimed appeal of right. Upon
consideration of appellee’s motion to strike appellant’s notice of appeal and
memorandum in support of jurisdiction,
IT IS ORDERED by the court that the motion is denied.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED, sua sponte, that appellee may file a
memorandum in response to appellant’s memorandum in support of
jurisdiction within 30 days of the date of this entry.

MISCELLANEOUS DISMISSALS

2005-1789. State ex rel. John Q. Public v. Etna Twp. Bd. of Trustees.
In Mandamus. This cause originated in this court on the filing of a
complaint for a writ of mandamus. Upon consideration of relator’s
application for dismissal,
IT IS ORDERED by the court that the application for dismissal is
granted. Accordingly, this cause is dismissed.

MISCELLANEOUS ORDERS

In re Report of the Commission on
Continuing Legal Education.
Carolyn D. Peterson
(#0054081)
Respondent.
Case No. CLE-05-54081
O R D E R
This matter originated in this court on the filing of a report by the
Commission on Continuing Legal Education (“commission”) pursuant to Gov.Bar
R. X(6)(A)(1)(b) and (A)(2)(d). The commission recommended the imposition of
sanctions against certain attorneys, including the above-named respondent, for
failure to comply with the provisions of Gov.Bar R. X, Attorney Continuing Legal
Education, for the 2003-2004 reporting period.
On May 16, 2006, this court adopted the recommendation of the
commission, imposed a sanction fee upon the respondent, and suspended the
respondent from the practice of law pursuant to Gov.Bar R. X(6)(B)(3) and
(5)(A)(4). The court further ordered that respondent shall not be reinstated to the
practice of law in Ohio until respondent complies with the requirements for
reinstatement set forth in Gov.Bar R. X(7); respondent complies with the Supreme
Court Rules for the Government of the Bar of Ohio; respondent complies with this
and all other orders of the court; and this court orders respondent reinstated.
On May 18, 2006, the commission filed a recommendation pursuant to
Gov.Bar R. X(7)(B)(2), finding that the respondent has paid all fees assessed for
noncompliance, has made up all deficiencies and is now in full compliance with all
requirements of Gov.Bar R. X, and recommending that the respondent be
reinstated to the practice of law in Ohio. The commission certified that respondent
had completed the credit hours of continuing legal education required during her
suspension by this court’s order of suspension. On May 17, 2006, respondent
satisfied all the requirements of this court’s order of suspension. Upon
consideration thereof,
IT IS ORDERED by the court that the recommendation of the commission is
adopted and respondent, Carolyn D. Peterson, is hereby reinstated to the practice of
law.

Later


0 Comments:

Post a Comment

<< Home