||The Respondent was disbarred on consent in New York State by order of July 8, 2002. The basis of the charges pending against the Respondent in New York at the time of his consent were that he fraudulently conveyed his interest in the marital residence to his wife in 1994 with the intent to hinder, delay, or defraud creditors, that he was involved in the creation of false evidence regarding the deed prepared in connection with that conveyance and a purported marital separation agreement between himself and his wife in 1994, and that he gave false testimony concerning these matters in depositions in a Federal District Court action and during depositions and trial proceedings.
Proceeding under Rule 216, Pa.R.D.E., Reciprocal Discipline, the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania issued an order and Notice of October 18, 2002 that Mr. Kovler state the reasons, if any, why this Court should not impose reciprocal discipline as a result of the July 8, 2002 order. The Respondent filed an Answer and Affidavit asserting mitigating factors and contending that disbarment was not warranted in this jurisdiction. The Office of Disciplinary Counsel filed a response asserting that the misconduct in New York State would support a disbarment in this jurisdiction and that the proposed mitigation was legally and factually insufficient in this jurisdiction.