Legal Opinion
In Re Iulo
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Decided February 20, 2001No. 560 Disciplinary Docket 2PublishedCited by 42 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
CAPPY, Justice.
This matter is before the court as a disciplinary enforcement proceeding. The specific context is a rule to show cause why respondent, Dennis J. lulo, should not be subject to reciprocal discipline due to his disbarment in New Jersey. Although we reject respondent’s argument that the Office of Disciplinary Counsel (hereinafter “ODC”) is precluded from seeking reciprocal discipline in this case, for the reasons set forth more fully below, we discharge the rule.
In 1972 respondent was admitted to practice law in New Jersey. An audit of respondent’s trust account revealed a…
2Cases cited10 opinions
- In Re WilsonSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1979
- Safeguard Mutual Insurance v. WilliamsSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1975
- Office of Disciplinary Counsel v. KellerSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1986
- Stilp v. HaferSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1998
- Office of Disciplinary Counsel v. SurrickSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2000
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by42 opinions
- Office of Disciplinary Counsel v. KiesewetterSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2005
- Levitt v. PatrickSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 2009
- Daley v. A.W. Chesterton, Inc.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2012
- Wilkes Ex Rel. Mason v. Phoenix Home Life Mutual Ins. Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2006
- Brown v. TucciDistrict Court, W.D. Pennsylvania · 2013
37 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.