| Case Digest |
Respondent was placed on inactive status in 1991 for failure to pay his annual fee. Not withstanding his inability to practice law in Pennsylvania, Respondent represented a client in three separate legal matters. Respondent appeared at arbitrations and identified himself as attorney for his client. He also cross examined witnesses and made closing arguments before a district justice. Both the Hearing Committee and the Disciplinary Board recommended a suspension of one year and one day. The Board found Respondent’s claim that he did not believe he was doing anything he considered to be legally involved to be disingenuous. The Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, by order dated July 22, 2005, suspended Respondent for a period of one year and one day.
|
