In re Seltzer

Illinois Supreme Court

In re Seltzer

217 Ill. 2d 655

CourtIllinois Supreme Court

DecidedNovember 15, 2005

DocketMR 20398

StatusPublished

This text of 217 Ill. 2d 655 (In re Seltzer) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Illinois Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

In re Seltzer, 217 Ill. 2d 655 (Ill. 2005).

Pincite

Opinion

Order of the Court:

The petition by the Administrator of the Attorney Registration and Disciplinary Commission to impose discipline on consent pursuant to Supreme Court Rule 762(b) is allowed, and respondent Barry Michael Seltzer is suspended from the practice of law for 60 days.

Suspension effective December 13, 2005.

Respondent Barry Michael Seltzer shall reimburse the Disciplinary Fund for any Client Protection payments arising from his conduct prior to the termination of the period of suspension.

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

Order of the Court:

The petition by the Administrator of the Attorney Registration and Disciplinary Commission to impose discipline on consent pursuant to Supreme Court Rule 762(b) is allowed, and respondent Barry Michael Seltzer is suspended from the practice of law for 60 days.

Suspension effective December 13, 2005.

Respondent Barry Michael Seltzer shall reimburse the Disciplinary Fund for any Client Protection payments arising from his conduct prior to the termination of the period of suspension.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

217 Ill. 2d 655, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-seltzer-ill-2005.