Home/Supreme Court of Pennsylvania/In re Steele

In re Steele

880 A.2d 1211, 584 Pa. 78
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania·Decided June 24, 2005·No. No. 311 Disciplinary Docket No. 3·Published

Opinion

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

AND NOW, this 24th day of June, 2005, a Rule having been issued upon Charles Ellis Steele pursuant to Rule 218(e)(6), Pa.R.D.E., on March 24, 2005, to show cause why an order denying reinstatement should not be entered, upon consideration of the responses filed, the Rule is discharged and the Petition for Reinstatement is hereby granted.

Pursuant to Rule 218(e), Pa.R.D.E., petitioner is directed to pay the expenses incurred by the Disciplinary Board in the investigation and processing of the Petition for Reinstatement.

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

In re Steele, 880 A.2d 1211, 584 Pa. 78 (Pa. 2005).

880 A.2d 1211 (In re Steele) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.