Office of Disciplinary Counsel v. Pitkow

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania

Office of Disciplinary Counsel v. Pitkow

847 A.2d 665

CourtSupreme Court of Pennsylvania

DecidedMarch 25, 2004

DocketNo. 910 Disciplinary Docket No. 3

StatusPublished

This text of 847 A.2d 665 (Office of Disciplinary Counsel v. Pitkow) 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. Pitkow, 847 A.2d 665 (Pa. 2004).

Pincite

Opinion

ORDER

PER CURIAM:

AND NOW, this 25th day of March, 2004, upon consideration of the contention of respondent-attorney that he is suffering from a disability condition which makes it impossible for him to prepare an adequate defense to disciplinary charges brought against him in connection with Office of Disciplinary Counsel File No. Cl-04-15, it is hereby

ORDERED that Martin B. Pitkow is immediately transferred to inactive status pursuant to Rule 301(e), Pa.R.D.E., for an indefinite period and until further order of the Court. Respondent shall comply with Rule 217, Pa.R.D.E. All pending disciplinary proceedings against the respondent-attorney shall meanwhile be held in abeyance, except for the perpetuation of testimony.

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

ORDER

PER CURIAM:

AND NOW, this 25th day of March, 2004, upon consideration of the contention of respondent-attorney that he is suffering from a disability condition which makes it impossible for him to prepare an adequate defense to disciplinary charges brought against him in connection with Office of Disciplinary Counsel File No. Cl-04-15, it is hereby

ORDERED that Martin B. Pitkow is immediately transferred to inactive status pursuant to Rule 301(e), Pa.R.D.E., for an indefinite period and until further order of the Court. Respondent shall comply with Rule 217, Pa.R.D.E. All pending disciplinary proceedings against the respondent-attorney shall meanwhile be held in abeyance, except for the perpetuation of testimony.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

847 A.2d 665, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/office-of-disciplinary-counsel-v-pitkow-pa-2004.