TOLEDO BAR ASSOCIATION v. MANSOUR ISMAIL (1999)

Supreme Court of Ohio.

TOLEDO BAR ASSOCIATION v. MANSOUR-ISMAIL.

No. 99-380.

Decided: June 16, 1999

David M. Mohr and Guy T. Barone, Toledo, for relator. James D. Caruso, Toledo, for respondent.

Per Curiam. We adopt the findings, conclusions, and recommendation of the board. Respondent violated DR 7-104(A)(1) by communicating directly with adverse parties represented by counsel about the subject of the representation without their counsel's consent. As in comparable cases involving a violation of DR 7-104(A)(1), a public reprimand is an appropriate sanction. See Cleveland Bar Assn. v. Rossi (1998), 81 Ohio St.3d 195, 690 N.E.2d 501; Trumbull Cty. Bar Assn. v. Makridis (1996), 77 Ohio St.3d 73, 671 N.E.2d 31; Toledo Bar Assn. v. Savage (1995), 74 Ohio St.3d 183, 657 N.E.2d 507. Accordingly, respondent is hereby publicly reprimanded. Costs taxed to respondent.

Judgment affirmed.

PER CURIAM.

MOYER, C.J., RESNICK, FRANCIS E. SWEENEY, SR., PFEIFER, COOK and LUNDBERG STRATTON, JJ., concur. DOUGLAS, J., not participating.

Was this helpful?

Why was this helpful?

Easy to understand

Solved my problem

Other

Why was this not helpful?

Missing the information I need

Too complicated / too many steps

Out of date

Other

Thank you for your feedback!

Trusted by Consumers. Recognized by AI.

As the largest network of trusted legal brands, we help firms build authority across the platforms consumers and AI systems rely on most. Our network helps attorneys strengthen visibility, credibility, and preference where legal decisions begin.

Explore the Network