In re Pasternak

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania

In re Pasternak

884 A.2d 846

CourtSupreme Court of Pennsylvania

DecidedSeptember 30, 2005

DocketNo. 1036 Disciplinary Docket No. 3

StatusPublished

This text of 884 A.2d 846 (In re Pasternak) 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 Pasternak, 884 A.2d 846 (Pa. 2005).

Pincite

Opinion

ORDER

PER CURIAM:

AND NOW, this 30th day of September, 2005, Steven Pasternak having been disbarred from the practice of law in the State of New Jersey by Order of the Supreme Court of New Jersey dated February 24, 2005; the said Steven Pasternak having been directed on July 6, 2005, to inform this Court of any claim he has that the imposition of the identical or comparable discipline in this Commonwealth would be unwarranted and the reasons therefor; and upon consideration of the responses filed, the request for delay of determination and for a hearing is denied, and it is

ORDERED that Steven Pasternak is disbarred from the practice of law in this Commonwealth, and he shall comply with all the provisions of Rule 217, Pa.R.D.E.

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 September, 2005, Steven Pasternak having been disbarred from the practice of law in the State of New Jersey by Order of the Supreme Court of New Jersey dated February 24, 2005; the said Steven Pasternak having been directed on July 6, 2005, to inform this Court of any claim he has that the imposition of the identical or comparable discipline in this Commonwealth would be unwarranted and the reasons therefor; and upon consideration of the responses filed, the request for delay of determination and for a hearing is denied, and it is

ORDERED that Steven Pasternak is disbarred from the practice of law in this Commonwealth, and he shall comply with all the provisions of Rule 217, Pa.R.D.E.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

884 A.2d 846, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-pasternak-pa-2005.