Skip to Main Content

April 2022

From the Chair
It is a true honor and pleasure to greet you all as the 2022-2023 Disciplinary Board Chair. I am grateful for the unique responsibility of this position and, along with Vice-Chair Dion G. Rassias and the other Members of the Board, firmly commit to upholding the integrity of the Board’s duty to Pennsylvania’s public and legal community.
As we continue to move forward from the immense challenges of the past two years, we look to further our efforts toward attorney misconduct prevention and the accessibility of resources for both the legal profession and the general public. Through the development of new online tools released this past year and the advanced partnerships with other court agencies and legal organizations, we strive to ever strengthen our role as one of service to the Commonwealth.
Proverbially, spring months bring with them occasion for growth and renewal. Later this month, the Board and the Administrative Office of Pennsylvania Courts will release a revamped online annual attorney registration form developed to better meet the needs of the profession and its members. In May, we will increase efforts toward raising awareness about mental health issues as we celebrate Mental Health Awareness Month and Well-Being Week in Law, noting the crucial role of overall health and well-being in both our personal and professional lives. The pandemic has had a tremendous impact on the mental health of the world in general, and attorneys in particular. It will be our mission going forward that we do whatever we can to protect and provide assistance to our fellow members of the bar.
This month, we also welcome the Board’s newest Member, Joshua M. Bloom, whose term commenced on April 1, 2022. We look forward to his contributions to the Board’s mission and work.
Lastly, I would personally like to thank the Supreme Court for this privilege to serve the Commonwealth in the Board’s mission to protect the public, maintain the integrity of the legal profession, and safeguard the reputation of the courts.
Respectfully yours,

Jerry M. Lehocky
Board Chair
Annual Attorney Registration

Online Registration Coming Soon!

Upcoming Registration Cycle Information
Online registration is NOT currently available but will open soon. As always, email reminders will be sent once registration is available on the UJS Portal. Please ensure that your contact information is current with the Board.
When you register this year, you will certainly notice some changes. While the changes are mostly minor, they are detailed below so that you may prepare as appropriate.
  1. 1. Fee Change – As reported in the March newsletter, the active annual assessment has increased to $275. The inactive annual assessment remains $100.
  2. 2. Portal Refresh – The Administrative Office of Pennsylvania Courts (AOPC) has worked diligently to “refresh” the UJS Portal. The crisp appearance and functional changes are not only visually appealing, but very user friendly.
  3. 3. Demographics – When answering the optional demographic questions, the online form will now allow for users to make more than one selection to represent their race and ethnicity.
  4. 4. Financial Data – While no changes have been made to the actual requirements for reporting financial accounts, the online form has been updated in an effort to promote the self-correction of reporting errors that may exist similar to those that have been uncovered by the Disciplinary Board and the PA IOLTA Board over the years. This section is now split into three sections as detailed here:
  • PA IOLTA & IOLTA Exempt - Two types of accounts should be reported in this section, regardless of the “bank location” that is primarily used. IOLTA accounts that hold (or were set up to hold) Pa.R.P.C. 1.15 funds should be reported here. Also to be reported in this section are IOLTA Exempt accounts where an official exemption has been granted by the PA IOLTA Board. If an exemption has not been granted by the IOLTA Board, the account information should be updated appropriately.
  • Out-of-State IOLTA - IOLTA accounts set up for clients outside of PA should be reported in this section, regardless of the “bank location” that is primarily used.
  • Interest for Clients, Other Authorized Accounts, and Business/Operating - No changes have been made to this section. All of the other accounts as required to be reported under Pa.R.D.E. 219(d)(1)(iii)-(v) should be listed here.
  1. 5. Batch Update – For proxy users who complete registration for multiple attorneys at one time, there have been some updates made to the “Batch Update” menu. The financial data sections will mirror what is detailed in #4 and additional pieces of information (office address, employer, and professional liability insurance designation) may be updated using this function.
  2. 6. Voucher Processing – The Board encourages users to “Pay Online” with a credit card for immediate confirmation of a completed registration once a credit card confirmation number is received. However, for those users who choose to “Pay by Mail” when submitting the annual registration form, the unique voucher that is created will not only have a different appearance but now must be submitted to a different address. The PO Boxes in Lancaster and Hazleton are no longer valid! Please update your records now to reflect that voucher payments should be sent to:
Attorney Registration
Attn: Voucher Payment
601 Commonwealth Avenue, Suite 5600
PO Box 62625

Harrisburg, PA 17106-2625

Discipline Imposed

March 2022
From Inactive Status
Lauren Vodopia Elbaz

From Retired Status
Jaime Rosenman-Gordon

From Administrative Suspension
Marc Joseph Farrell
Scott James Hansen
Reinstatement Denied
Brian Joseph Smith


Note: The above-listed granted reinstatement matters reflect only those granted by Supreme Court Order. An attorney listed as reinstatement granted, but whose current license status does not reflect reinstatement, has yet to submit the fees necessary to finalize reinstatement.
The Supreme Court of Pennsylvania is aided by select boards, committees, commissions, and councils consisting of more than 180 appointed volunteers – most, but not all, are lawyers and judges. The panels have a wide range of responsibilities and functions. Some make recommendations to the Court for amendments, revisions, or simplification of court procedural rules. Others regulate the practice of law, oversee continuing legal education for lawyers, and administer funds to assist individuals unable to pay for legal services. Still others advise on keeping the courts free of bias and discrimination and on long-range planning.

There are currently vacancies on the following panels:

  • Appellate Court Procedural Rules Committee – Applicants should be knowledgeable about the Pennsylvania Rules of Appellate Procedure and be experienced in state appellate practice in Pennsylvania.
  • Civil Procedural Rules Committee – Applicants should be knowledgeable about the Pennsylvania Rule of Civil Procedure and be experienced in state civil practice Pennsylvania.
  • Minor Judiciary Education Board – Applicants should be knowledgeable about the practice and procedure in the magisterial district courts, as well as the curriculum and coursework that is required of the certifying program for prospective minor court judges.

Application Instructions

If you would like to be considered to serve on a board, committee, advisory group, or related independent entity, email the application, cover letter, resume, and other pertinent information expressing your reasons of interest to

More information may be found on the Unified Judicial System of Pennsylvania website.
Applications are due by April 30, 2022
Upcoming Public Proceedings
We encourage you to observe our public disciplinary and reinstatement hearings, oral arguments, and public reprimands on the Board’s YouTube channel. You can also view “Upcoming Public Proceedings” at the bottom of the Board’s home page,

Scheduled proceedings begin at 9:30 am unless otherwise noted.

Disciplinary Board News

John P. Goodrich, Former Board Chair, Leaves Board After Completing Terms of Service

John P. Goodrich, Esq. of Pittsburgh has left the Disciplinary Board after the end of his tenure as Board Chair. Prior to his Board service, Mr. Goodrich was a volunteer Hearing Committee Member from 1999-2005. He was appointed to the Board by the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania in 2016 and was reappointed in 2019. As a Board Member, Mr. Goodrich served on the Finance & Personnel and Education Committees before becoming Board Chair on April 1, 2021.

During his time as Chair, Mr. Goodrich led the Disciplinary Board’s release of several online resources - including the Case Research Collection, an online filings system, and a “Pro Bono” webpage - developed to better serve Pennsylvania’s attorneys and public. In part, Mr. Goodrich’s work as Board Chair can be found in the recently-released 2021 Annual Report.

The Disciplinary Board extends its most sincere gratitude to Mr. Goodrich for his years of dedication to the Board’s mission and work.


Joshua M. Bloom Appointed as Member of Pa. Disciplinary Board
The Supreme Court of Pennsylvania has appointed Joshua M. Bloom to serve a six-year term as a Member of the Disciplinary Board, effective April 1, 2022.

Bloom has been practicing law in Pennsylvania for more than 25 years and has extensive knowledge and experience in labor, employment, and personal injury law.

Serving as faculty of the Pennsylvania Bar Institute and Union Lawyers Alliance, Bloom frequently engages with national and local organizations to speak on matters of labor and employment laws. Read More...


Supreme Court Amends Confidentiality Rules

By Order dated March 22, 2022, the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania adopted amendments to the Pennsylvania Rules of Disciplinary Enforcement (Pa.R.D.E.), relating to confidentiality of proceedings.

Pa.R.D.E. 102, Definitions, adds definitions for “formal proceedings” and “informal proceedings.” Informal proceedings begin with a complaint submitted to the Office of Disciplinary Counsel or an investigation initiated by that office, and cover all proceedings up to the filing of a petition for discipline. Informal proceedings are not open to the public. Formal proceedings begin with the filing of a petition for discipline, and are open to the public. Documents generated in an informal proceeding are not open, unless they are made part of the record in a formal proceeding.

Pa.R.D.E. 209, formerly titled Immunity, is amended to “Complaints and Immunity.” A new subsection (a) provides that the complaint shall not be provided to a respondent-attorney unless and until formal charges are filed and the complainant is designated as a witness, or Disciplinary Counsel determines that it contains exculpatory material. Hearing committee members or special masters are authorized to enter protective orders to prevent disclosure of the complaint to the public upon cause shown.

Several amendments are made to Pa.R.D.E. 402, Access to Disciplinary Information and Confidentiality. Subsection 3(c) now provides that proceedings based on a criminal conviction under Pa.R.D.E. 214(d) are open on the same basis as petitions for temporary suspension under Pa.R.D.E. 208(f).

The amendment adds three exceptions to the requirement of confidentiality under subsection (d). Disciplinary Counsel are authorized to disclose the disposition of a complaint to the complainant, including describing the discipline imposed and any conditions attached. The Board is permitted to exercise its discretion to allow public access to a complaint or portions where the interests of justice require, with prior notice to the parties. Disciplinary Counsel may make a referral of an attorney to Lawyers Concerned for Lawyers of Pennsylvania (LCL-PA), and share information as part of the referral. LCL-PA may not report information about a subject attorney to Disciplinary Counsel.

A new subsection (4) is added to Pa.R.D.E. 402(e), specifying documents not open to the public, to clarify that a complaint filed with Disciplinary Counsel or the Board is not part of the open record.

A new note to the rule clarifies that the proceeding and the petition for discipline do not become public until an answer has been filed, or the time to file an answer has passed.

These amendments take effect thirty days from adoption, or on April 21, 2022.
CDC Corner

The Disciplinary Process — Part Two
As I described last month, most complaints are dismissed without the need for intensive investigation. This month, we’ll follow complaints that survive to the conclusion of informal proceedings. See Pa.R.D.E. 102.
The Office of Disciplinary Counsel (ODC) conducts a confidential factual investigation. See June 2021 Attorney Newsletter, CDC Corner. If we determine that there might be a disciplinary violation, we issue a Form DB-7, a Request for Statement of Respondent’s Position. See D. Bd. Rules § 87.7(b). The request may include a demand for documents. See D. Bd. Rules § 87.7(e).
Issuance of a DB-7 is a condition precedent to any recommendation for discipline. See D. Bd. Rules § 87.7(a). ODC’s practice is to issue a DB-7 as well in any case where we intend to dismiss but contemplate sending a letter of concern or education.
The Rules do not set any evidentiary standard for the issuance of a DB-7, nor a format other than that it must advise the respondent of “the nature of the grievance” and the “name and address of the complainant.” See D. Bd. Rules § 87.7(b)(1). We consider the standard to be probable cause to believe that a violation has occurred, and the appropriate format to be that of a detailed civil complaint, with numbered paragraphs making one factual allegation per paragraph.
The receipt of a DB-7 is the crucial moment at which the respondent can affect the outcome, for better or worse. Failure to respond at all is itself a disciplinary violation. See Pa.R.D.E. 203(b)(7); D. Bd. Rules § 87.7(f). The failure to produce records demanded in a DB-7 can be grounds for the emergency temporary suspension of an attorney. See Pa.R.D.E. 208(f)(5); December 2021 Attorney Newsletter, CDC Corner. Noncompliance signals that the respondent does not take his ethical obligations seriously.
On the other hand, an honest and thorough response to a DB-7 can persuade ODC to dismiss the investigation. In fact, two-thirds of DB-7s eventually lead to dismissal. Even when a violation is serious enough to require more than a dismissal, a DB-7 response that convincingly acknowledges the error and describes reparative efforts to change practices, address mental health issues, and to undo any harm to the client can persuade ODC, a hearing committee, the Board, and the Court that lesser discipline is sufficient. For these reasons, we have started to accompany DB-7s with a one-page notice advising respondents of its seriousness and urging them to retain experienced counsel.
The DB-7 and its answer may be shared with the complainant in order to obtain the complainant’s response to the allegations, what we call a replication.
More investigation and sometimes negotiation follow issuance of the DB-7 and receipt of its answer. If the assigned disciplinary counsel decides that there was an ethical violation and it warrants a sanction, she must draft a form DB-3, which is essentially a prosecution memorandum. It summarizes the complaint, the DB-7 and its response, and the facts developed in the investigation. The DB-3 draws conclusions as to which rules were violated, discusses mitigating and aggravating evidence, and recommends the appropriate sanction. The discussion includes a comparison to disciplinary precedents. The Counsel in Charge of the District and Chief Disciplinary Counsel must review and approve it before the matter can go further. DB-3s are considered confidential work-product and they are not shared with the respondent, the complainant, or the public. See Pa.R.D.E. 402(e).
A hearing committee member is assigned to review the DB-3. See D. Bd. Rules §§ 87.31, 87.32. The assigned member may approve or modify the recommendation, including dismissal of charges. ODC can accept this, or we can appeal to the Board. In cases where ODC appeals a reviewing hearing committee member’s recommendation, and in all cases where the reviewing member recommends a private or public reprimand, a three-member Board panel is assigned to review the matter. The Board panel may approve or modify the reviewing hearing committee member’s recommendation and its decision is final, unless ODC petitions the Supreme Court for allowance of appeal, an uncommon occurrence. See Pa.R.D.E. 207(c)(4); D. Bd. Rules §§ 87.33, 87.34.
Once the DB-3 review process ends, the respondent is notified if the disposition was an admonition or a reprimand. He can choose to accept it or demand the filing of formal charges. See Pa.R.D.E. 208(a)(6); D. Bd. Rules § 87.54. If the DB-3 recommendation is for formal charges, the next step is for ODC to prepare and serve a petition for discipline. Its service commences the “formal” and public stage of the disciplinary process; everything up to now has been “informal” and confidential. See Pa.R.D.E. 102.

Thomas J. Farrell
Chief Disciplinary Counsel
Articles of Interest
DOJ Accuses Google of Gaming Attorney-Client Privilege

In a motion filed with a Federal Court in the District of Columbia, the U.S. Department of Justice has accused Google of taking advantage of attorney-client privilege to improperly shield certain documents from discovery.

The motion argues that Google’s “Communicate with Care” program, launched in 2016, trains and directs employees to add an attorney, a privilege label, and a generic “request” for counsel’s advice to shield sensitive business communications, regardless of whether any legal advice is actually needed or sought. The motion argues that such requests are so routine that in-house counsel frequently doesn’t respond.

The motion requests that the Court order the production of all documents withheld for attorney-client privilege where counsel did not respond to the request.

A Google spokesperson noted that Google has provided four million documents in the litigation, and insisted that Google is working diligently to comply with discovery requirements.


After Copyright Fight, Georgia Allows Public Access to Annotated Statutes

In 2015, the state of Georgia sued for copyright infringement in a federal court in Atlanta for making access to its annotated statutes available to the public. The nonprofit organization, run by public access activist Carl Malamud, copied the annotated version and posted it online. The state did not contend the texts of statutes themselves were copyrighted, but described the annotations as “works for hire” which were protected under copyright law. Under its contract with a division of LexisNexis, the annotated legal code was only available to subscribers or purchasers, at a cost over $400.

The case worked its way to the United States Supreme Court, which held by a 5-4 decision that the Copyright Act’s protection of “original works of authorship” did not extend to annotations prepared by or at the behest of a public body.1

On March 21, 2022, the chairman of Georgia’s House Judiciary Committee, State Rep. Chuck Efstration, who is also chairman of the Georgia Code Revision Commission, announced that the annotated version will now be available for free through LexisNexis.

According to the New York Times, approximately 20 other states have claimed that parts of similar annotated codes are copyrighted.

An unofficial version of Pennsylvania’s annotated statutes is available at no cost through Thompson Reuters Westlaw.


May Jury View 3D Reenactment of Incident? Judge Is Skeptical

A defense lawyer in Florida has asked a Court to allow a new approach to expert testimony. He has requested that jurors, wearing virtual reality goggles, be allowed to view a computer-generated 3D graphic illustrating the expert’s testimony.

Defense lawyer Ken Padowitz represents Benjamin Siegel, who is charged with attempted murder for trying to run his neighbor over with his Dodge Viper. Padowitz’s expert contends that the incident was unintentional. A firm called Eyewitness Animations created the 3D graphic to allow jurors to view a simulation of the incident from the point of view of the defendant.

When he was a prosecutor, Padowitz used 2D animation created by the company, a practice that was upheld on appeal. Although he knows of no instances of 3D animations using reality goggles being presented to juries elsewhere in the country, Padowitz plans to use the animation technique in another case, and believes they will someday be used in countless criminal trials.

Judge Ernest A. Kollra, Jr. appeared reluctant to allow the use of the technology. He expressed concern that jurors would see different things when they turned their heads different ways.


Lawyer Attacks Ex’s Law Office with Crossbow

A disbarred former attorney in California lost his appeal of a civil judgment rendered in favor of his ex-girlfriend on tort theories of stalking, intentional infliction of emotional distress, and domestic violence, based on a pattern which included firing arrows from a crossbow into her law office building.

A jury found that Steven A. Weinkauf committed the acts, including the crossbow assault, against Adriana J. Quintero, two years after she ended their romantic relationship. Quintero installed video cameras after three occasions of crossbow arrows being shot into the windows of her building, which caught a figure in a red Jeep firing a gun and a crossbow at the building. A search of Weinkauf’s residence found a red Jeep, crossbow, arrows, and helmet.

Weinkauf appealed the judgment against him, but the Court of Appeal affirmed the judgment.


Court Pops Strawberry Pop Tarts Case

Is there nothing in this world one can rely on? A $5 million complaint filed in a Federal court in Illinois alleged (gasp) that there are not enough strawberries in Strawberry Pop Tarts.

The suit alleged that Kellogg Co. defrauded shoppers with deceptive packaging for its Unfrosted Strawberry Pop-Tarts, which contain red food dye to make the filling "brighter and more appealing" on grocery store shelves, and that it contains other fruits including pears and apples.

U.S. District Judge Marvin Aspen of the Northern District of Illinois would have none of it, however. In a Memorandum Opinion and Order issued March 1, 2022, he granted Kellogg’s motion to dismiss, finding that the product’s packaging did not claim a particular amount of strawberries went into the filling or that it contained nothing but strawberries. “No reasonable consumer could conclude that the filling contains a certain amount of strawberries based on the package’s images and its use of the term ‘strawberry,’” he wrote.
1The case produced an unusual alignment of dissents, with Justices Thomas, Alito, and Breyer (partially joining) on one dissent, and Justices Ginsberg and Breyer on another.

Attorney Well-Being

Well-Being Week in Law is May 2-6

Consistent with May being Mental Health Awareness Month, the week of May 2nd has been declared this year’s “Well-Being Week in Law” (WWIL). Sponsored by the Institute for Well-Being in Law, this observance is intended to raise awareness about mental health and encourage action and innovation across the profession to improve well-being. Formerly known as “Lawyer Well-Being Week,” it was renamed in 2021 to reflect that people in the legal system other than lawyers also suffer from the pressures that can harm an individual’s well-being.

The WWIL website offers resources for both organizations, including law firms, and individuals to use the occasion of WWIL to promote mental health and well-being in practice. Resources available to organizations include the “What Went Well” guide, full of examples of law firm actions that have proven successful; the “Legal Association Participation Guide 2022,” which provides activities for legal associations (such as bar associations) to share with their members; and the “Legal Employer Participation Guide 2022,” which lists readings, videos, podcasts, and activities for WWIL and all year-round. This guide is regularly updated, so it is a resource than can be consulted frequently.

For individuals, the website offers a daily activity guide for each day of WWIL, each organized around a theme: Stay Strong, Align, Engage and Grow, Connect, and Feel Well.

The website also offers a 20-episode podcast with entertaining, conversational presentations by well-being pioneers from all sectors of the legal space, including legal employers, judges, law schools, regulators, bar associations, State Well-Being Task Forces and Commissions, professional liability carriers, lawyer assistance programs and wellness thought-leaders.




Lawyers Concerned for Lawyers (LCL) is a confidential and safe resource for Pennsylvania attorneys and their family members who may be struggling with their mental health or substance use. An astounding one in three legal professionals will face these issues at some point in their career. Since 1988, LCL has confidentially assisted and supported thousands of individuals who have faced a myriad of challenges (including grief, stress, anxiety, depression, eating disorders, gambling problems, problematic alcohol or prescription drug use, etc.), helping them navigate through dark and difficult times. Members of our profession are dying because they are afraid or unable to ask for help. If you or someone you know is struggling, please call us. You may save a life. There is help and there is hope.

Resource Guide for the Legal Profession During COVID-19

Confidential 24/7 Helpline: 1-888-999-1941

Lawyers-only support meetings
Peer and staff support & resource coordination
LCL resources are free, voluntary, & confidential
Free CLE, resources, and information at 
Assessment by a healthcare professional to determine a customized treatment plan, if indicated

Around the Court

The Supreme Court of Pennsylvania to Celebrate Its Tricentennial
On May 22, 2022, the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania will celebrate its 300th anniversary. The oldest appellate court in the United States, it has played an important part in the history of both our Commonwealth and the nation’s judicial system. Highlighting the Court’s extraordinary position and influence, a series of upcoming events has been organized in commemoration of its tricentennial. The anniversary committee includes Disciplinary Board Members Robert J. Mongeluzzi (who serves as committee co-chair) and David S. Senoff as well as Hearing Committee Member Sharon R. López.
A special in-person oral argument session will be held at Old City Hall in Philadelphia on Wednesday, May 18th. With limited seating available in the courtroom and developing COVID-19 mitigation guidelines, the Court anticipates a start time to be designated for each scheduled matter. A final schedule and mitigation protocols will be available on the Court’s website no later than 3:00 p.m. on Friday, May 13th.
Also in Philadelphia, the Court will host a two-day symposium at the National Constitution Center. A panel including PA Supreme Court Justices, justices from other state supreme courts, and members of the bar and academia will illustrate key features of the Court's jurisprudence and the position of today's Court as the head of the Commonwealth's Unified Judicial System. Led by special guest Anthony Kennedy, retired Associate Justice of the Supreme Court of the United States, the panel also will explore broader issues related to the nation’s judicial system.
The Supreme Court invites K-12 students to join in the celebration. In a recent press release, Chief Justice Max Baer affirmed, “Recognizing the crucial role that civics education plays in the public’s understanding of the judiciary, we are excited to expand our 300th celebration efforts to involve students at all grade levels.” Last week, the Court announced two contests available to PA students in public, private, charter, cyber-charter, or home school. For those ages five to eleven, a coloring contest allows to students to creatively design and color their own judge figure while an essay contest, open to students in grades three through twelve, prompts entrants to consider the role of the Court and its Justices. All entries are due Friday, May 6th.
Follow along with the tricentennial celebration on social media via #Supreme300.

100% of your donation to the Pennsylvania IOLTA Board goes directly to fund civil legal aid to low-income Pennsylvanians across the Commonwealth. The IOLTA Board makes grants to more than 30 civil legal aid organizations every year. Your donation makes it possible for these organizations to say “yes” to more people in need.

Make your donation when you complete your annual attorney registration or anytime online.

To see who donated last year and to learn more about the Pennsylvania IOLTA Board, check out their 2021 Annual Report.
From the Pennsylvania Bar Association 

May Is the Time for PBA’s Annual Meeting and Law Day/Month Celebrations
There are always many exciting professional opportunities, CLE programs, meetings, and more happening at the PBA to help support your practice. The month of May is special, however, because Law Day celebrations officially kick off on May 1st, and in Pennsylvania, the PBA and county bar associations hold events throughout the entire month to educate the public on the importance of the Rule of Law in the Unites States. Learn more on PBA's Law Day webpage
From May 11-13, PBA invites attorneys to attend the PBA Annual Meeting in Hershey to network with fellow lawyers and celebrate outstanding achievements at the Awards luncheon. Participants will attend the Women in the Profession Annual Conference on Wednesday and the Committee/Section Day and Annual Dinner with keynote remarks from Justice Christine L. Donohue on Thursday. Those who cannot travel to Hershey can attend Thursday committees and sections meetings by conference call. On Friday’s House of Delegates Meeting, the PBA will congratulate Kathleen Wilkinson on her many significant accomplishments as PBA President. The gavel will officially then be passed to Jay Silberblatt as he becomes the 128th PBA President. Chief Justice Max Baer will deliver the State of the Judiciary address to the House. Learn more and register on the PBA website

Please note that the Disciplinary Board of the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania and the Pennsylvania Bar Association (PBA) are separate organizations. For more information about PBA, visit their website
We Want To Hear From You...
We are always on the lookout for stories of interest relating to legal ethics, new issues in the practice of law, lawyer wellness, and funny or just plain weird stories about the legal profession. If you come across something you think might be enlightening, educational, or entertaining to our readers or social media followers, pass it along. If you are our original source, there may be a hat tip in it for you.

Copyright (C) 2022 The Disciplinary Board of the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania. All rights reserved.

Disciplinary Board of the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania,
601 Commonwealth Avenue, Suite 5600, PO Box 62625, Harrisburg, PA 17106