Disciplinary Counsel v. Smith

Annotate this Case

Download PDF

[Cite as Disciplinary Counsel v. Smith, ___ Ohio St.3d ___, 2018-Ohio-2468.] DISCIPLINARY COUNSEL v. SMITH. [Cite as Disciplinary Counsel v. Smith, ___ Ohio St.3d ___, 2018-Ohio-2468.] (No. 2017-0487—Submitted June 22, 2018—Decided June 26, 2018.) ON APPLICATION FOR REINSTATEMENT. ____________________ {¶ 1} This cause came on for further consideration upon the filing of an application for reinstatement by respondent, Samuel Ray Smith II, Attorney Registration No. 0076242, last known business address in Cleveland, Ohio. {¶ 2} The court coming now to consider its order of December 6, 2017, wherein the court, pursuant to Gov.Bar R. V(12)(A)(3), suspended respondent from the practice of law for a period of 18 months, with the final 12 months stayed on the condition that he engage in no further misconduct, finds that respondent has substantially complied with that order and with the provisions of Gov.Bar R. V(24). {¶ 3} Therefore, it is ordered by this court that respondent is reinstated to the practice of law in the state of Ohio. {¶ 4} It is further ordered that the clerk of this court issue certified copies of this order as provided for in Gov.Bar R. V(17)(D)(1) and that publication be made as provided for in Gov.Bar R. V(17)(D)(2). {¶ 5} For earlier case, see Disciplinary Counsel v. Smith, 152 Ohio St.3d 131, 2017-Ohio-8821, 93 N.E.3d 955. O’CONNOR, C.J., and O’DONNELL, KENNEDY, FRENCH, FISCHER, DEWINE, and DEGENARO, JJ., concur. ________________________

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.