| Case Digest |
By Order dated March 11, 2003, the Supreme Court of New Jersey suspended Respondent for three months for failing to communicate, in writing, the basis or rate of his fee to a client, failing to deliver funds to which the client was entitled, practicing law while ineligible to do so and failing to cooperate with disciplinary authorities. The Order directed that the suspension was to run concurrently with the three month suspension imposed by the New Jersey Supreme Court by Order dated November 13, 2002. (With respect to the New Jersey Supreme Court’s Order of November 13, 2002, the Pennsylvania Supreme Court imposed a three-month reciprocal suspension by Order dated May 6, 2003).
By Notice and Order dated June 27, 2 003, the Pennsylvania Supreme Court directed Respondent to show cause why, in connection with the New Jersey Supreme Court’s Order of March 11, 2003, the imposition of identical or comparable discipline in this Commonwealth would be unwarranted. Respondent did not file a response.
By Order dated October 2, 2003, the Pennsylvania Supreme Court suspended Respondent for three months to run concurrent with the suspension previously imposed on May 6, 2003. Justices Castille, Nigro and Lamb dissented.
|
