In re Gingrich

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania

In re Gingrich

663 A.2d 676

CourtSupreme Court of Pennsylvania

DecidedJuly 13, 1995

DocketNo. 128, Disciplinary Docket; No. 3-Supreme Court

StatusPublished

This text of 663 A.2d 676 (In re Gingrich) 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 Gingrich, 663 A.2d 676 (Pa. 1995).

Pincite

Opinion

ORDER

PER CURIAM:

AND NOW, this 13th day of July, 1995, upon consideration of the Certificate of Admission of Disability by Attorney that the respondent-attorney is suffering from a disabling condition which makes it impossible for him to prepare an adequate defense to a complaint of professional misconduct brought against him in connection with Office of Disciplinary Counsel file number C3-93-278, it is hereby

ORDERED that Jay H. Gingrich is immediately transferred to inactive status pursuant to Rule 301(e), Pa.R.D.E. for an indefinite period and until further order of this Court. Respondent shall comply with Rule 217, Pa.R.D.E. All pending disciplinary proceedings against the respondent-attorney shall meanwhile be held in abeyance, except for the perpetuation of testimony.

MONTEMURO, J., is sitting by designation.

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

ORDER

PER CURIAM:

AND NOW, this 13th day of July, 1995, upon consideration of the Certificate of Admission of Disability by Attorney that the respondent-attorney is suffering from a disabling condition which makes it impossible for him to prepare an adequate defense to a complaint of professional misconduct brought against him in connection with Office of Disciplinary Counsel file number C3-93-278, it is hereby

ORDERED that Jay H. Gingrich is immediately transferred to inactive status pursuant to Rule 301(e), Pa.R.D.E. for an indefinite period and until further order of this Court. Respondent shall comply with Rule 217, Pa.R.D.E. All pending disciplinary proceedings against the respondent-attorney shall meanwhile be held in abeyance, except for the perpetuation of testimony.

MONTEMURO, J., is sitting by designation.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

663 A.2d 676, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-gingrich-pa-1995.