Legal Opinion
In re Sullivan
Court of Judicial Discipline of Pennsylvania
Decided January 14, 2016No. 2 JD 13; No. 5 JD 14; No. 9 JD 15PublishedCited by 5 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION BY
JUDGE JACK PANELLA
There is no place for corruption in the Pennsylvania judiciary. No type of corruption is acceptable in Pennsylvania.
PROCEDURAL SUMMARY
There are three docket entries for Michael J. Sullivan, the Respondent and a former judge of the Philadelphia Traffic Court.1 The Judicial Conduct Board initially filed a petition for interim suspension on January 31, 2013. That petition was docketed to No. 2 JD 2013. On August 9, 2013, this Court entered a decision and order which suspended Sullivan, without pay, pending further order of court.2 In accordance with our opinion and…
Also in this document: Per curiam.
2Cases cited15 opinions
- In Re Formal Inquiry Concerning Judge DienerCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1973
- In re BrunoSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2014
- In Re SmithCourt of Judicial Discipline of Pennsylvania · 1996
- In Re TrkulaCourt of Judicial Discipline of Pennsylvania · 1997
- In Re JoyceCourt of Judicial Discipline of Pennsylvania · 1998
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by5 opinions
- In re ShawCourt of Judicial Discipline of Pennsylvania · 2018
- In re TiddCourt of Judicial Discipline of Pennsylvania · 2017
- In Re: Dawn Segal, JudgeSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2017
- In Re: Dawn Segal, JudgeSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2017
- In re JenningsCourt of Judicial Discipline of Pennsylvania · 2018