Office of Disciplinary Counsel v. Braun
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION OF THE COURT
FLAHERTY, Justice.
This disciplinary proceeding presents the question of whether respondent attorney’s admitted egregious misconduct is sufficiently mitigated by evidence of psychiatric illness to justify the sanction of suspension rather than disbarment. We hold that respondent, Seymour H. Braun, presented psychiatric testimony which established that his neurotic depression was a causal factor in his misconduct, and therefore adopt the recommendation of the Disciplinary Board that he be suspended from the practice of law for two years.
*159In November, 1980, respondent…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Office of Disciplinary Counsel v. LewisSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1981
- Office of Disciplinary Counsel v. WittmaackSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1987
- Office of Disciplinary Counsel v. KisselSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1982
3Cited by77 opinions
- Office of Disciplinary Counsel v. CostiganSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1990
- Office of Disciplinary Counsel v. ChristieSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1994
- Office of Disciplinary Counsel v. MonsourSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1997
- Office of Disciplinary Counsel v. CappuccioSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2012
- Office of Disciplinary Counsel v. PozonskySupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2018
72 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.