Office of Disciplinary Counsel v. Block

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania

Office of Disciplinary Counsel v. Block

829 A.2d 661

CourtSupreme Court of Pennsylvania

DecidedMay 19, 2003

DocketNo. 839 Disciplinary Docket No. 3

StatusPublished

This text of 829 A.2d 661 (Office of Disciplinary Counsel v. Block) 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

Office of Disciplinary Counsel v. Block, 829 A.2d 661 (Pa. 2003).

Pincite

Opinion

ORDER

PER CURIAM:

AND NOW, this 19th day of May, 2003, there having been filed with this Court by Gary R. Block his verified Statement of Resignation dated March 26, 2003, stating that he desires to resign from the Bar of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania in accordance with the provisions of Rule 215, Pa.R.D.E., it is

[662]*662ORDERED that the resignation of Gary R. Block be and it is hereby accepted and he is DISBARRED ON CONSENT from the Bar of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania; and it is farther ORDERED that he shall comply with the provisions of Rule 217, Pa.R.D.E. Respondent shall pay costs, if any, to the Disciplinary Board pursuant to Rule 208(g), Pa.R.D.E.

Mr. Justice LAMB did not participate in this matter.

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

ORDER

PER CURIAM:

AND NOW, this 19th day of May, 2003, there having been filed with this Court by Gary R. Block his verified Statement of Resignation dated March 26, 2003, stating that he desires to resign from the Bar of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania in accordance with the provisions of Rule 215, Pa.R.D.E., it is

[662]*662ORDERED that the resignation of Gary R. Block be and it is hereby accepted and he is DISBARRED ON CONSENT from the Bar of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania; and it is farther ORDERED that he shall comply with the provisions of Rule 217, Pa.R.D.E. Respondent shall pay costs, if any, to the Disciplinary Board pursuant to Rule 208(g), Pa.R.D.E.

Mr. Justice LAMB did not participate in this matter.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

829 A.2d 661, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/office-of-disciplinary-counsel-v-block-pa-2003.