No specific laws identified for this ruling.
The Ohio Bar Association sought disciplinary action against attorney Selnick for multiple violations of professional conduct rules, resulting in permanent disbarment due to extensive misconduct including neglect, dishonesty, and unfitness to practice law.
Attorneys at law—Misconduct—Permanent disbarment—Neglect of an entrusted legal matter—Failing to seek lawful objectives of client—Failing to carry out contract of employment—Prejudicing or damaging client during course of professional relationship—Failing to render appropriate accounts to client—Failing to promptly pay or deliver to client funds, securities, or other property client is entitled to receive—Engaging in conduct involving dishonesty, fraud, deceit, or misrepresentation—Failing to comply with known local customs of courtesy or practice of the bar or particular tribunal without giving notice—Engaging in undignified or discourteous conduct which is degrading to a tribunal—Intentionally or habitually violating any established rule of procedure or of evidence—Engaging in conduct adversely reflecting on fitness to practice law—Handling a legal matter which attorney knows or should know he is not competent to handle—Engaging in conduct prejudicial to the administration of justice.
This summary was generated to explain the ruling in plain English and is not legal advice.
Mandamus—Labor relations—Public employees—R.C. Ch. 4117—State Employment Relations Board abused its discretion in dismissing public employee's unfair-labor-practice charge against employer because employer did not have authority to determine that employee's notice to arbitrate was untimely under collective-bargaining agreement—Board abused its discretion when it dismissed public employee's unfair-labor-practice charge against union without providing basic rationale for dismissal—Board did not abuse its discretion when it dismissed public employee's additional unfair-labor-practice charge against union, because union acted in accordance with public employee's waiver of union representation—Court of appeals' judgment granting writ of mandamus affirmed in part and reversed in part.
Workers' compensation—Temporary-total-disability compensation—R.C. 4123.56—Employee who had already been terminated for violation of employment policies before his shoulder surgery was not "unable to work" as "direct result of an impairment arising from an injury or occupational disease" under plain language of R.C. 4123.56(F) and thus was not entitled to receive temporary-total-disability compensation—Court of appeals' judgment reversed and writ granted.
Quo warranto—Mandamus—Appellants failed to challenge court of appeals' judgment dismissing their quo warranto claim on basis of laches and therefore waived that argument—Court of appeals' determination that appellants could not establish entitlement to city-council offices or that appellees were unlawfully holding the positions affirmed—Court of appeals' denial of request for writ of mandamus ordering continued payment of salaries and benefits as moot affirmed.
Court rulings like this one are useful, but every situation is different. Take 2 minutes to see which laws may protect you — it's free, private, and no account is required to start.
This ruling information is sourced from public court records via CourtListener.com. It is provided for informational and educational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice.