The Law Lion Logo - AI-powered legal writing assistantThe Law Lion
Home
Features
Pricing
Services
AboutBlogCasesContact
Login
Ask Law Lion AI
  1. Home
  2. >Cases
  3. >Butler County Bar Ass'n v. Derivan
Ohio Supreme Court

Butler County Bar Ass'n v. Derivan

No. 97-2259·Judge: Cook, Douglas, Moyer, Pfeifer, Resnick, Stratton, Sweeney·Attorney: Michael T. Gmoser and Gregory K. Pratt, for relator., Frank J. Schiavone, for respondent.0 citations·Filed April 1, 1998

Table of Contents

  • Summary of the case Butler County Bar Ass'n v. Derivan
  • Key Issues of the case Butler County Bar Ass'n v. Derivan
  • Key Facts of the case Butler County Bar Ass'n v. Derivan
  • Decision of the case Butler County Bar Ass'n v. Derivan
  • Opinions
  • Opinions
  • Per Curiam. We have reviewed the record and adopt the findings and conclusion...

Table of Contents

  • Summary of the case Butler County Bar Ass'n v. Derivan
  • Key Issues of the case Butler County Bar Ass'n v. Derivan
  • Key Facts of the case Butler County Bar Ass'n v. Derivan
  • Decision of the case Butler County Bar Ass'n v. Derivan
  • Opinions
  • Opinions
  • Per Curiam. We have reviewed the record and adopt the findings and conclusion...

Summary of the case Butler County Bar Ass'n v. Derivan

The court reviewed the record and adopted the board's findings, determining that a more severe sanction was necessary. The respondent was found to have deliberately manufactured a document to exonerate himself in a disciplinary proceeding. Consequently, the respondent is suspended from practicing law in Ohio for six months.

Key Issues of the case Butler County Bar Ass'n v. Derivan

  • Negligence in failing to file a case within the statute of limitations
  • Deliberate manufacturing of a document for exoneration

Key Facts of the case Butler County Bar Ass'n v. Derivan

  • Respondent failed to file a case within the statute of limitations
  • Respondent manufactured a document and presented it as genuine

Decision of the case Butler County Bar Ass'n v. Derivan

Respondent is suspended from the practice of law in Ohio for six months.

Opinions

Per Curiam. We have reviewed the record and adopt the findings and conclusions of the board. However, we believe a more severe sanction is warranted. This case involves more than respondent’s negligence in failing to file a case within the appropriate statute of limitations.

Respondent deliberately manufactured a document to exonerate himself and presented it as genuine in a formal disciplinary proceeding. Respondent is hereby suspended from the practice of law in Ohio for six months. Costs taxed to respondent. Judgment accordingly.

Moyer, C.J., Douglas, Resnick, F.E. Sweeney, Pfeifer, Cook and Lundberg Stratton, JJ., concur.

The Law Lion logoThe Law Lion.

The Law Lion is the only platform combining AI legal writing grounded in real case law with an expert human writing service — serving attorneys, paralegals, and everyday people nationwide.

info@thelawlion.com
Mon–Fri 9am–6pm EST · Rush available
Serving Clients Nationwide

AI Tool

  • → AI Legal Writing Tool
  • → AI Document Drafting
  • → Motion Drafting
  • → Contract Drafting
  • → Legal Research
  • → Case Law Search
  • → Citation Generator
  • → Document Review
  • → Contract Review
  • → For Lawyers

Writing Service

  • → Eviction Defense
  • → Court Documents
  • → Custody & Family
  • → Divorce Documents
  • → Debt & Collections
  • → All Writing Services

Top Guides

  • → Eviction Response Guide
  • → Best AI Legal Tools 2026
  • → Debt Validation Letter Guide

Company

  • → About The Law Lion
  • → Client Results
  • → Transparent Pricing
  • → Legal Guides & Blog
  • → Contact & Free Consult
  • → Affiliate Program

Top Services

  • → Eviction Notice Response
  • → Debt Validation Letter
  • → Court Summons Response
© 2026 The Law Lion LLC · AI Legal Writing & Expert Document Service
Privacy PolicyTerms of ServiceSitemap