In re Bloom

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania

In re Bloom

669 A.2d 881

CourtSupreme Court of Pennsylvania

DecidedNovember 30, 1995

DocketNo. 697, Disciplinary Docket No. 2

StatusPublished

This text of 669 A.2d 881 (In re Bloom) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Pennsylvania primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

In re Bloom, 669 A.2d 881 (Pa. 1995).

Pincite

Opinion

ORDER

PER CURIAM:

AND NOW, this 30th day of November, 1995, upon consideration of the Report and Recommendations of the Disciplinary Board of the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania dated November 7,1995, the Petition for Reinstatement is granted.

Pursuant to Rule 218(e), Pa.R.D.E., petitioner is directed to pay the expenses incurred by the Board in the investigation and processing of the Petition for Reinstatement.

CASTILLE, J., did not participate in this matter.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

ORDER

PER CURIAM:

AND NOW, this 30th day of November, 1995, upon consideration of the Report and Recommendations of the Disciplinary Board of the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania dated November 7,1995, the Petition for Reinstatement is granted.

Pursuant to Rule 218(e), Pa.R.D.E., petitioner is directed to pay the expenses incurred by the Board in the investigation and processing of the Petition for Reinstatement.

CASTILLE, J., did not participate in this matter.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

669 A.2d 881, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-bloom-pa-1995.