01/02/2004 Case Announcements - Ohio Supreme Court Opinion - Ohio Supreme Court Decision

	ROMINGER LEGAL
		Ohio Court Cases and Opinions - Ohio Legal Research
					Need Legal Help?
					Need Legal Help?
LEGAL RESEARCH CENTER
LEGAL RESEARCH CENTER			LEGAL HEADLINES - CASE LAW - LEGAL FORMS	NOT FINDING WHAT YOU NEED? -RESEARCH

This court case was taken from the web sites of the Ohio Courts. Search our site for more cases - CLICK HERE

LEGAL RESEARCH

COURT REPORTERS

PRIVATE INVESTIGATORS

PROCESS SERVERS

DOCUMENT RETRIEVERS

EXPERT WITNESSES

Find a Private Investigator

Find an Expert Witness

Find a Process Server

Case Law - save on Lexis / WestLaw.

Legal News - Legal Headlines

[Cite as 01/02/2004 Case Announcements, 2004-Ohio-11.]
The Supreme Court of Ohio

CASE ANNOUNCEMENTS AND ADMINISTRATIVE ACTIONS

January 2, 2004

MOTION AND PROCEDURAL RULINGS

2003-1441. State v. Roberts.
Trumbull C.P. No. 01CR793. This cause is pending before the court as a death
penalty appeal from the Court of Common Pleas of Trumbull County. Upon
consideration of appellant's motion for extension of time to transmit the record,
IT IS ORDERED by the court that the motion for extension of time to transmit
the record be, and hereby is, granted, and the time for transmitting the record is
extended to January 31, 2004.

2003-1901. State ex rel. Campbell v. Indus. Comm.
Franklin App. No. 02AP-1253, 2003-Ohio-4824. This cause is pending before the
court as an appeal from the Court of Appeals for Franklin County. Upon
consideration of appellant's motion for stay to pursue settlement under
S.Ct.Prac.R. XIV,
IT IS ORDERED by the court that the motion for stay be, and hereby is,
granted to the extent that the time for filing appellant's merit brief is extended to
January 20, 2004.

2003-1904. State v. Ferguson.
Montgomery C.P. No. 2002CR0353. This cause is pending before the court as a
death penalty appeal from the Court of Common Pleas of Montgomery County.
Upon consideration of appellant's motion for stay of execution pending appeal to
this court,
IT IS ORDERED by the court that the motion for stay be, and hereby is,
granted.

RECONSIDERATION OF PRIOR DECISIONS

2003-0967. Cleveland Mun. School Dist. Bd. of Edn. v. Cuyahoga Cty. Bd. of
Revision, .
Cuyahoga App. No. 81507, 2003-Ohio-1728. Reported at 100 Ohio St.3d 1537,
2003-Ohio-6733, 800 N.E.2d 371.
IT IS ORDERED by the court that the motion for reconsideration in this case
be, and hereby is, denied.

DISCIPLINARY CASES

2003-1844. In re Muhlbach.
On December 3, 2003, and pursuant to Gov.Bar R. V(5)(A)(3), the Secretary of the
Board of Commissioners on Grievances and Discipline of the Supreme Court of
Ohio certified to the Supreme Court a certified copy of a judgment entry of a
felony conviction against Peter Michael Muhlbach, an attorney licensed to practice
law in the state of Ohio.

Upon consideration thereof and pursuant to Gov.Bar R. V(5)(A)(4), it is
ordered and decreed that Peter Michael Muhlbach, Attorney Registration No.
0058412, last known business address in Parma, Ohio, be, and hereby is,
suspended from the practice of law for an interim period, effective as of the date of
this entry.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that this matter be, and is hereby, referred to
the Cuyahoga County Bar Association for investigation and commencement of
disciplinary proceedings.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that respondent immediately cease and desist
from the practice of law in any form and is hereby forbidden to appear on behalf of
another before any court, judge, commission, board, administrative agency or other
public authority.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that, effective immediately, respondent be
forbidden to counsel or advise, or prepare legal instruments for others or in any
manner perform legal services for others.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that respondent is hereby divested of each, any
and all of the rights, privileges and prerogatives customarily accorded to a member
in good standing of the legal profession of Ohio.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that, pursuant to Gov.Bar R. X(3)(G),
respondent shall complete one credit hour of continuing legal education for each
month, or portion of a month of the suspension. As part of the total credit hours of
continuing legal education required by Gov.Bar R. X(3)(G), respondent shall
complete one credit hour of instruction related to professional conduct required by
2
1-2-04

Gov.Bar R. X(3)(A)(1), for each six months, or portion of six months, of the
suspension.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that respondent shall not be reinstated to the
practice of law in Ohio until (1) respondent complies with the requirements for
reinstatement set forth in the Supreme Court Rules for the Government of the Bar
of Ohio; (2) respondent complies with this and all other orders issued by this court;
(3) respondent complies with the Supreme Court Rules for the Government of the
Bar of Ohio; and (4) this court orders respondent reinstated.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED, sua sponte, by the court, that within 90 days
of the date of this order, respondent shall reimburse any amounts that have been
awarded by the Clients' Security Fund pursuant to Gov.Bar R. VIII(7)(F). It is
further ordered, sua sponte, by the court that if, after the date of this order, the
Clients' Security Fund awards any amount against the respondent pursuant to
Gov.Bar R. VIII(7)(F), the respondent shall reimburse that amount to the Clients'
Security Fund within 90 days of the notice of such award.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that on or before 30 days from the date of this
order, respondent shall:

1. Notify all clients being represented in pending matters and any co-
counsel of respondent's suspension and consequent disqualification to act as an
attorney after the effective date of this order and, in the absence of co-counsel, also
notify the clients to seek legal service elsewhere, calling attention to any urgency
in seeking the substitution of another attorney in respondent's place;

2. Regardless of any fees or expenses due respondent, deliver to all clients
being represented in pending matters any papers or other property pertaining to the
client, or notify the clients or co-counsel, if any, of a suitable time and place where
the papers or other property may be obtained, calling attention to any urgency for
obtaining such papers or other property;

3. Refund any part of any fees or expenses paid in advance that are
unearned or not paid, and account for any trust money or property in respondent's
possession or control;

4. Notify opposing counsel in pending litigation or, in the absence of
counsel, the adverse parties of respondent's disqualification to act as an attorney
after the effective date of this order, and file a notice of disqualification of
respondent with the court or agency before which the litigation is pending for
inclusion in the respective file or files;

5. Send all such notices required by this order by certified mail with a
return address where communications may thereafter be directed to respondent;

6. File with the Clerk of this court and the Disciplinary Counsel of the
Supreme Court an affidavit showing compliance with this order, showing proof of
3
1-2-04

service of notices required herein, and setting forth the address where the affiant
may receive communications; and

7. Retain and maintain a record of the various steps taken by respondent
pursuant to this order.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that respondent shall keep the Clerk, the
Cuyahoga County Bar Association and the Disciplinary Counsel advised of any
change of address where respondent may receive communications.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED, sua sponte, that all documents filed with this
court in this case shall meet the filing requirements set forth in the Rules of
Practice of the Supreme Court of Ohio, including requirements as to form, number,
and timeliness of filings.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED, sua sponte, that service shall be deemed made
on respondent by sending this order, and all other orders in this case, by certified
mail to the most recent address respondent has given to the attorney registration
office.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Clerk of this court issue certified
copies of this order as provided for in Gov.Bar R. V(8)(D)(1), that publication be
made as provided for in Gov.Bar R. V(8)(D)(2), and that respondent bear the costs
of publication.

Moyer, C.J., Resnick, F.E. Sweeney, Pfeifer, Lundberg Stratton, O'Connor
and O'Donnell, JJ., concur.

MISCELLANEOUS DISMISSALS

1999-1241. Ameritech Ohio v. Pub. Util. Comm.
Public Utilities Commission, No. 971723-TP-CSS. This cause is pending before
the court as an appeal from the Public Utilities Commission of Ohio. Upon
consideration of appellant's application for dismissal,
IT IS ORDERED by the court that the application for dismissal be, and hereby
is, granted.
ACCORDINGLY, IT IS FURTHER ORDERED by the court that this cause be,
and hereby is, dismissed.

2003-1786. State ex rel. Kidwell v. Indus. Comm.
Franklin App. No. 02AP-940, 2003-Ohio-4509. This cause is pending before the
court as an appeal from the Court of Appeals for Franklin County. It appears from
the records of this court that appellant has not filed a merit brief, due December 22,
2003, in compliance with the Rules of Practice of the Supreme Court and therefore
has failed to prosecute this case with the requisite diligence. Upon consideration
thereof,
4
1-2-04

IT IS ORDERED by the court that this cause be, and hereby is dismissed sua
sponte.

2003-1803. State ex rel. Gen. Elec. Co. v. Indus. Comm.
Franklin App. No. 03AP-8, 2003-Ohio-4702. This cause is pending before the
court as an appeal from the Court of Appeals for Franklin County. It appears from
the records of this court that appellant has not filed a merit brief, due December 22,
2003, in compliance with the Rules of Practice of the Supreme Court and therefore
has failed to prosecute this case with the requisite diligence. Upon consideration
thereof,
IT IS ORDERED by the court that this cause be, and hereby is, dismissed sua
sponte.

2003-1863. State v. Fisher.
Summit App. No. 20701, 2002-Ohio-3026. This cause is pending before the court
as a discretionary appeal and claimed appeal of right. It appears from the records
of this court that appellant has not filed a memorandum in support of jurisdiction,
due December 26, 2003, in compliance with the Rules of Practice of the Supreme
Court and therefore has failed to prosecute this case with the requisite diligence.
Upon consideration thereof,
IT IS ORDERED by the court that this cause be, and hereby is dismissed sua
sponte.

MEDIATION REFERRALS

The following cases have been returned to the regular docket pursuant to
S.Ct.Prac.R. XIV(6)(E):

2003-1899. State ex rel. Besser v. Columbus.
In Mandamus.

5
1-2-04