Respondent had been suspended from the practice of law in the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania for two years by Order of the Pennsylvania Supreme Court dated October 26, 1993. At the time of Respondentís misconduct, Respondent had not petitioned for reinstatement and remained on suspended status. Respondent, while employed by the law office of John H. Croom, IV, engaged in the unauthorized practice of law and in prohibited law-related activities by, inter alia, managing Mr. Croomís law office, supervising Mr. Croomís associate, communicating with clients, soliciting new clients, receiving fees from clients, and offering legal advice to clients. Respondent also misrepresented his identity to others while employed by Mr. Croom. Mr. Croom was frequently absent from the office when Respondent engaged in his misconduct.
Prior to Respondentís employment with Mr. Croom, Respondent engaged in the unauthorized practice of law by handling two bankruptcy cases on behalf of two separate debtors. Based on Respondentís misconduct in the two bankruptcy cases, the bankruptcy court was required to take action to address Respondentís misconduct. Respondent also failed to comply with Orders issued by the bankruptcy court directing him, inter alia, to disgorge the fees he received from the debtors and to pay monetary sanctions to the court.
In aggravation of discipline, Respondent expressed no remorse for his misconduct and had a history of discipline consisting of three informal admonitions in 1978, one informal admonition in 1985, a private reprimand in 1992, and a two-year suspension by Order of the Pennsylvania Supreme Court dated October 26, 1993.
||RPC 5.5(a), RPC 5.5(b), RPC 8.4(c), RPC 8.4(d), and Pa.R.D.E. 203(b)(3) via Pa.R.D.E. 217(j)(1), Pa.R.D.E. 217(j)(2), 217(j)(3), 217(j)(4)(iv), 217(j)(4)(v), 217(j)(4)(vi), 217(j)(4)(x), 217(j)(5).