Disciplinary Counsel v. O'Diam
Citations
- 168 Ohio St. 3d 137
- 196 N.E.3d 812
- 2022 Ohio 1370
Syllabus
Attorneys—Misconduct—Violation of Jud.Cond.R. 2.8(B) by failing to be patient, dignified, or courteous to litigants or witnesses while acting in an official capacity and failing to require similar conduct of a lawyer subject to the judge's direction and control—Conditionally stayed six-month suspension.
How courts have described this case
Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.
- testimony beyond scope of first complaint doctrine is admissible “for the independent purpose of rebutting the inferences raised by the defendant’s inquiries”
- no error where defendant \opened the door\ to unfavorable testimony during cross-examination
Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).
Judges: Per Curiam
Read full opinion on CourtListenerSourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).
This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.