Loading

Disciplinary Reporter Case Digest

Attorney ID 30618
Attorney Name Holder, Reginald H.
DBP Docket No. 131 DB 1999
Supreme Court Docket No. 660 D.D. No. 3
County Philadelphia
Disciplinary Counsel Anthony P. Sodroski
Counsel for Respondent Pro Se
Decision Date 2001-03-23
Effective Date 2001-04-22
Case Digest After being transferred to inactive status for failing to comply with the annual course requirements of the Pennsylvania Continuing Legal Education Board, Respondent entered his appearance in five criminal court matters and appeared in court on behalf of the clients who had retained him. Respondent did not inform opposing counsel, court personnel, judges or other attorneys with whom he had contact that he was on inactive status and ineligible to practice law. Respondent’s misconduct occurred over the course of three months and ended when the Supervising Judge of the Criminal Division ordered that Respondent’s appearance be withdrawn and that substitute counsel be appointed. During the term of his inactive status, Respondent used improper letterhead along with the title “Esquire” and did not notify the administrative office of his change in residence address. Between 1983 and 1995, Respondent was disciplined on six occasions. His record consisted of three informal admonitions and three private reprimands, all but one of which were essentially for neglect of legal matters.
Rule Violation(s) 203(b)(3) via 217(c), 203(b)(3) via 217(d) and 203(b)(3) via 219(d)(3); 1.16(a)(1), 5.5(b), 7.1(a), 7.5(a), 7.5(b), 8.4(b) and 8.4(d)
Discipline Imposed One Year & One Day Suspension
Points of Law A history of discipline is an aggravating factor. Even if some of a respondent’s prior discipline dates back many years, the history must be considered in determining the disciplinary sanction. A lawyer who continues to practice law and represent clients after he is transferred to inactive status will be suspended.
Report/Opinion Download