In re Denker

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania

In re Denker

849 A.2d 1202

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania·Decided May 28, 2004·No. No. 196 Disciplinary Docket No. 3·Published

Opinion

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

AND NOW, this 28th day of May, 2004, upon consideration of the Report and Recommendations of the Disciplinary Board and Dissenting Report and Recommendation dated March 5, 2004, 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.

Justice NEWMAN dissents and would deny reinstatement.

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

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

AND NOW, this 28th day of May, 2004, upon consideration of the Report and Recommendations of the Disciplinary Board and Dissenting Report and Recommendation dated March 5, 2004, 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.

Justice NEWMAN dissents and would deny reinstatement.

In re Denker, 849 A.2d 1202 (Pa. 2004).

Pincite

849 A.2d 1202 (In re Denker) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.