Skip to main content

Cleveland Metropolitan Bar Ass'n Certified Grievance Committee v. Sliwinski

OhioApril 1, 2015No. No. 2015-0439Cited 2 times
Defendant WinSliwinski

Case Details

Judge(s)
Connor, Donnell, French, Kennedy, Lanzinger, Neill, Pfeifer
Status
Published
Procedural Posture
motion to dismiss

Related Laws

No specific laws identified for this ruling.

Outcome

The Ohio Supreme Court granted an emergency motion for interim remedial suspension of attorney Teddy Sliwinski, immediately suspending his law license pending final disciplinary proceedings based on conduct posing substantial threat of serious harm to the public.

What This Ruling Means

# Cleveland Metropolitan Bar Association v. Sliwinski ## What Happened The Cleveland Metropolitan Bar Association's ethics committee brought charges against attorney Teddy Sliwinski, claiming his conduct posed a serious danger to the public. The association sought to immediately remove his license to practice law while the full disciplinary process moved forward. ## What the Court Decided Ohio's highest court agreed and suspended Sliwinski's law license right away. This temporary suspension stopped him from practicing law pending the completion of formal disciplinary hearings to determine what permanent action should be taken. ## Why This Matters for Workers This case shows that courts can quickly remove attorneys from practice when there's evidence of serious misconduct—protecting workers and the public from potentially harmful legal representation. Workers dealing with workplace issues rely on trustworthy lawyers to represent them fairly. This ruling demonstrates that legal licensing boards have the power to act swiftly to prevent further harm, even before a case is fully resolved. It reinforces that attorneys face real consequences for conduct that threatens the people they serve.

This summary was generated to explain the ruling in plain English and is not legal advice.

Similar Rulings

State ex rel. Haydocy v. Ohio Pub. Emps. Retirement Sys.
OhioMay 2026
Defendant Win
State ex rel. AutoZone Stores, Inc. v. Indus. Comm.
OhioNov 2024

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.

Defendant Win
Shabazz
OhioNov 2024

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.

Defendant Win
Read Full OpinionMore Sliwinski RulingsAll Rulings

Facing something similar at work?

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.

Check Your RightsLearn the Basics

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.