ODC v. Patrick Stephen Healy

CourtSupreme Court of Pennsylvania
DecidedJune 22, 2017
DocketODC v. Patrick Stephen Healy - No. 2383 DD3
StatusPublished

This text of ODC v. Patrick Stephen Healy (ODC v. Patrick Stephen Healy) 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
ODC v. Patrick Stephen Healy, (Pa. 2017).

Opinion

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

OFFICE OF DISCIPLINARY COUNSEL, : No. 2383 Disciplinary Docket No. 3

Petitioner : No. 68 DB 2017

v. : Attorney Registration No. 56257

PATRICK STEPHEN HEALY, : (Allegheny County)

Respondent

ORDER

PER CURIAM

AND NOW, this 22nd day of June, 2017 upon consideration of the

Recommendation of the Three -Member Panel of the Disciplinary Board, the Joint

Petition in Support of Discipline on Consent is granted, and Patrick Stephen Healy is

suspended from the Bar of this Commonwealth for a period of four years. The

suspension is stayed in its entirety, and Respondent is placed on probation for a period

of four years, subject to the following conditions:

1. Respondent shall continue treatment with Larry Sellitto, Ph.D., or another

qualified mental healthcare therapist, who is to direct and supervise

Respondent's activities therein;

2. Respondent shall cooperate with directions of the therapist supervising his

treatment, take medications as prescribed, engage in therapy and

counseling sessions as directed, and undergo prescribed random urine

toxicology monitoring;

3. Respondent shall cause the therapist supervising his treatment to make

written reports directed to the Secretary of the Board on a quarterly basis for the first two years of the probation and on a semi-annual basis for the

balance of probation;

4. The written reports shall include the identity and dosage of medications

being currently prescribed, the nature and frequency of the therapy

sessions since any prior report, the identity of the health services agency

or agent providing the same, and an assessment of Respondent's mental

condition at that time in regard to his mental fitness to engage in the

practice of law;

5. Respondent shall immediately authorize and direct Dr. Sellitto, or any

substitute or successor supervising therapist, to furnish a written report of

facts and circumstances to the Secretary of the Board at any time when, in

the estimation of the supervising therapist, Respondent's behavior or

material failure to conduct himself in cooperation with any aspect of his

prescribed treatment regimen indicates that he is, or may be, in jeopardy

of shortly becoming mentally unfit to engage in the practice of law;

6. If, for any reason, Respondent severs his relationship with Dr. Sellitto, he

shall immediately make a written report to the Secretary of the Board of

that fact and the circumstances causing the same, together with the

identification and location of another qualified therapist, who has been fully

informed of the terms of this probation and has agreed to serve as a

successor supervising therapist in accordance with the same;

7. Respondent shall furnish, at any time it may reasonably be requested, his

written authorization for any healthcare agency or agent to furnish to the

Secretary of the Board complete records of and information as to any mental health or underlying medical care services which may have been

provided to him.

8. At the conclusion of the prescribed period of probation, Respondent shall

apply for termination of probation in accordance with Disciplinary Board

Rule §89.293(c).

Respondent shall pay costs to the Disciplinary Board, pursuant to Pa.R.D.E. 208(g).

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

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
ODC v. Patrick Stephen Healy, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/odc-v-patrick-stephen-healy-pa-2017.