Turning Insight Into Action
Ohio Supreme Court formally adopts Amendment to Rule 1.2, clarifying that Ohio lawyers can advise medical marijuana companies
Bringing the uproar surrounding attorney representation of Ohio medical marijuana clients largely to an end, on September 20th the Ohio Supreme Court formally adopted an amendment to Prof.Cond.R. 1.2(d). The new Rule 1.d(d) reads: (d)(1) A lawyer shall not counsel a client to engage, or assist…
Attorney Ethics and Legal Marijuana: Ohio Supreme Court Proposes Partial Fix
We’ve covered the ethical issues associated with legal marijuana on this blog previously, including the August 2016 advisory opinion issued by the Board of Professional Conduct. Today, the Ohio Supreme Court proposed a rule change to Rule 1.2 that would allow attorneys to represent…
Attorney Ethics and Legal Marijuana: Amendments Proposed to Rules 1.2 and 8.4
The recent advisory opinion issued by the Ohio Supreme Court Board of Professional Conduct has led to a myriad of concerns among lawyers and others in Ohio’s medical marijuana community. Thankfully, the Chief Justice of the Ohio Supreme Court is aware and the Court…
Attorney Ethics and Legal Marijuana: Advisory Opinion 2016-6
Summary This past June, a number of Ohio attorneys (including our firm) submitted a request to the Board for an advisory opinion on three distinct issues (for a primer on the professional issues involving Ohio’s medical marijuana law, click here): Whether an Ohio lawyer may ethically…
Attorney Ethics and Legal Marijuana
With the recent passage of H.B. 523, medical marijuana in Ohio will become a reality this September. Most people are familiar with the fact that the rule-making process will take some time, but Ohio attorneys are presented with a more difficult question: can we…