Office of Disciplinary Counsel v. Lucarini
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION OF THE COURT
HUTCHINSON, Justice.
This matter is before us on Disciplinary Counsel’s and respondent’s cross-exceptions to our Disciplinary Board’s report in which a majority of the Board recommended respondent’s suspension from the practice of law for two years.1 Disciplinary Counsel contends respondent must be disbarred because he converted clients’ funds. While respondent admits he commingled clients’ funds, he argues *274that discipline harsher than public censure is inappropriate because his conduct, while not excused, was mitigated as the product of his self-confessed alcoholism. He…
Also in this document: Concurrence.
2Cases cited9 opinions
- Bradley v. FisherSupreme Court of the United States · 1872
- Office of the Disciplinary Counsel v. CampbellSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1975
- Berlant AppealSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1974
- Office of Disciplinary Counsel v. LewisSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1981
- Matter of LeopoldSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1976
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by123 opinions
- Matter of AddamsDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1990
- Office of Disciplinary Counsel v. KellerSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1986
- Office of Disciplinary Counsel v. KiesewetterSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2005
- Office of Disciplinary Counsel v. ChristieSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1994
- Office of Disciplinary Counsel v. CasetySupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1986
118 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.