Opinion
No. 90-1092
Submitted July 31, 1990 —
Decided October 31, 1990.
Attorneys at law — Misconduct — Disbarment — Reciprocal discipline.
ON CERTIFIED ORDER of the District of Columbia Court of Appeals and the Request of Disciplinary Counsel.
On April 12, 1990, respondent, Thomas L. Root, was disbarred by consent from the Bar of the District of Columbia Court of Appeals. In accordance with Section 12, Rule XI of the Rules Governing the Bar of the District of Columbia, respondent was disbarred after delivering an affidavit to the bar counsel in which respondent stated that he was: freely and voluntarily consenting to disbarment, fully aware of the implications involved in making the consent, aware and informed of the allegations of misconduct pending against him, acknowledging that the material facts and the allegations were true, and giving consent because he knew he could not successfully defend against the pending charges.
A certified copy of the disbarment order was obtained by relator, Disciplinary Counsel, who filed a copy with the Clerk of the Supreme Court of Ohio on June 18, 1990, as required by Gov. Bar R. V(44). On June 18, 1990, we ordered respondent to show cause within twenty days of receiving the order why identical or comparable discipline should not be imposed upon him. Respondent's agent received the order on June 22, 1990. Respondent has not responded to the show cause order.
Based on respondent's failure to show cause within the prescribed time limits set forth in Gov. Bar R. V(44), Disciplinary Counsel requests that respondent be disbarred from the practice of law in the state of Ohio.
J. Warren Bettis, disciplinary counsel, for relator.
Having failed to show cause why discipline should not be imposed upon him under Gov. Bar R. V(44), respondent is hereby disbarred from the practice of law in the state of Ohio.
Judgment accordingly.
MOYER, C.J., SWEENEY, HOLMES, DOUGLAS, WRIGHT, H. BROWN and RESNICK, JJ., concur.