In re Roth

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania

In re Roth

742 A.2d 1051, 560 Pa. 49, 1998 Pa. LEXIS 659

CourtSupreme Court of Pennsylvania

DecidedFebruary 10, 1998

DocketNo. 389 Disciplinary Docket No. 3

StatusPublished

This text of 742 A.2d 1051 (In re Roth) 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 Roth, 742 A.2d 1051, 560 Pa. 49, 1998 Pa. LEXIS 659 (Pa. 1998).

Pincite

Opinion

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

AND NOW, this 10th day of February, 1998, The Report and Recommendations of The Disciplinary Board of the Su[50]*50preme Court of Pennsylvania dated December 9, 1997, are approved and IT IS ORDERED that STEVEN JAY ROTH, who has been on inactive status, has never been suspended or disbarred, and has demonstrated that he has the moral qualifications, competency and learning in law required for admission to practice in the Commonwealth, shall be and is, hereby reinstated to active status as a member of the Bar of this Commonwealth. The expenses incurred by the Board in the investigation and processing of the Petition for Reinstatement shall be paid by the Petitioner.

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

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

AND NOW, this 10th day of February, 1998, The Report and Recommendations of The Disciplinary Board of the Su[50]*50preme Court of Pennsylvania dated December 9, 1997, are approved and IT IS ORDERED that STEVEN JAY ROTH, who has been on inactive status, has never been suspended or disbarred, and has demonstrated that he has the moral qualifications, competency and learning in law required for admission to practice in the Commonwealth, shall be and is, hereby reinstated to active status as a member of the Bar of this Commonwealth. The expenses incurred by the Board in the investigation and processing of the Petition for Reinstatement shall be paid by the Petitioner.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

742 A.2d 1051, 560 Pa. 49, 1998 Pa. LEXIS 659, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-roth-pa-1998.