Disciplinary Counsel v. Bonar
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
[Cite as Disciplinary Counsel v. Bonar, ___ Ohio St.3d ___, 2013-Ohio-5766.] DISCIPLINARY COUNSEL v. BONAR. [Cite as Disciplinary Counsel v. Bonar, ___ Ohio St.3d ___, 2013-Ohio-5766.] Attorneys at law Reciprocal discipline from the Supreme Court of Kentucky Public reprimand Gov.Bar R. V(11)(F)(4). (No. 2013-1790 Submitted December 27, 2013 Decided December 31, 2013.) ON CERTIFIED ORDER of the Supreme Court of Kentucky, Case No. 2013-SC-000335-KB. __________________ {¶ 1} This cause is pending before the Supreme Court of Ohio in accordance with the reciprocal-discipline provisions of Gov.Bar R. V(11)(F). {¶ 2} On November 13, 2013, relator, disciplinary counsel, filed with this court a certified copy of an order of the Supreme Court of Kentucky entered August 29, 2013, in Kentucky Bar Assn. v. Bonar, in case No. 2013-SC-000335KB, publicly reprimanding respondent. On November 14, 2013, this court ordered respondent to show cause why identical or comparable discipline should not be imposed in this state. {¶ 3} On consideration thereof, it is ordered and adjudged by this court that pursuant to Gov.Bar R. V(11)(F)(4), respondent, Barbara D. Bonar, Attorney Registration No. 0043797, last known business address in Covington, Kentucky, is publicly reprimanded. This public reprimand shall be considered as a factor that may justify an increase in the degree of discipline to be imposed for subsequent misconduct. {¶ 4} It is further ordered, sua sponte, by the court that within 90 days of the date of this order, respondent shall reimburse any amounts that have been awarded against respondent by the Clients Security Fund pursuant to Gov.Bar R. VIII(7)(F). It is further ordered, sua sponte, by the court that if after the date of SUPREME COURT OF OHIO this order, the Clients Security Fund awards any amount against respondent pursuant to Gov.Bar R. VIII(7)(F), respondent shall reimburse that amount to the Clients Security Fund within 90 days of the notice of that award. {¶ 5} It is further ordered, sua sponte, that all documents filed with this court in this case shall meet the filing requirements set forth in the Rules of Practice of the Supreme Court of Ohio, including requirements as to form, number, and timeliness of filings. {¶ 6} It is further ordered, sua sponte, that service shall be deemed made on respondent by sending this order and all other orders in this case by certified mail to the most recent address respondent has given to the Office of Attorney Services. {¶ 7} 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. O CONNOR, C.J., and PFEIFER, O DONNELL, LANZINGER, KENNEDY, FRENCH, and O NEILL, JJ., concur. ______________________ 2
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.
