Disciplinary Counsel v. Friedman
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
[Cite as Disciplinary Counsel v. Friedman, 121 Ohio St.3d 1222, 2009-Ohio-1352.] DISCIPLINARY COUNSEL v. FRIEDMAN. [Cite as Disciplinary Counsel v. Friedman, 121 Ohio St.3d 1222, 2009-Ohio-1352.] (No. 2006-2341 Submitted March 2, 2009 Decided March 9, 2009.) ON APPLICATION FOR REINSTATEMENT. __________________ {¶ 1} This cause came on for further consideration upon the filing of an application for reinstatement by respondent, Benjamin Stuart Friedman, Attorney Registration No. 0074348, last known business address in Kingman, Arizona. {¶ 2} The court coming now to consider its order of June 6, 2007, wherein the court, pursuant to Gov.Bar R. V(6)(B)(3), suspended respondent for a period of two years, with the final six months stayed on conditions, finds that respondent has substantially complied with that order and with the provisions of Gov.Bar R. V(10)(A). {¶ 3} Therefore, it is ordered by this court that respondent is reinstated to the practice of law in the state of Ohio. It is further ordered that respondent is placed on probation from the date of this order until October 2010 with the following conditions: (1) respondent must successfully complete his Ohio Lawyers Assistance Program contract, (2) respondent shall continue to be evaluated and follow the course of treatment recommended by a mental health professional, (3) respondent shall submit a report from a mental health professional certifying that he is fit to practice law, and, (4) respondent shall commit no further misconduct. {¶ 4} It is further ordered that on or before thirty days from the date of this order relator shall file with the Clerk of this court the name of the attorney who will serve as respondent's monitor, in accordance with Gov.Bar R. V(9). It is SUPREME COURT OF OHIO further ordered that at the end of respondent's probationary period, relator shall file with the Clerk of this court a report indicating whether respondent, during the probationary period, complied with the terms of the probation. {¶ 5} It is further ordered that at the end of the probationary period respondent may apply for termination of probation as provided in Gov.Bar R. V(9). It is further ordered that respondent's probation shall not be terminated until (1) respondent files an application for termination of probation in compliance with Gov.Bar R. V(9)(D), (2) respondent complies with this and all other orders issued by this court, (3) respondent complies with the Rules for the Government of the Bar of Ohio, (4) relator files with the Clerk of this court a report indicating that respondent has complied with the terms of the probation, and (5) this court orders that the probation be terminated. {¶ 6} It is further ordered that the Clerk of this court issue certified copies of this order as provided for in Gov.Bar R. V(8)(D)(1), that publication be made as provided for in Gov.Bar R. V(8)(D)(2), and that respondent bear the costs of publication. {¶ 7} For earlier case, see Disciplinary Counsel v. Friedman, 114 Ohio St.3d 1, 2007-Ohio-2477, 866 N.E.2d 1076. MOYER, C.J., and PFEIFER, LUNDBERG O DONNELL, LANZINGER, and CUPP, JJ., concur. ______________________ 2 STRATTON, O CONNOR,
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
