Office of Disciplinary Counsel v. Zdrok
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION OF THE COURT
CAPPY, Justice.
Petitioner, the Office of Disciplinary Counsel, was granted an appeal by allowance and appeals the order of the Disciplinary Board (Board) which dismissed charges filed by Petitioner against Vladimir N. Zdrok. Our review in attorney discipline matters is de novo, and thus we are not bound by the findings of either the Disciplinary Board Hearing Committee or the Board. Office of Disciplinary Counsel v. Shorall, 527 Pa. 413, 592 A.2d 1285 (1991). Nevertheless, we are guided by their findings with respect to matters of credibility of witnesses, and we accord…
Also in this document: Concurrence.
2Cases cited13 opinions
- Krenzelak v. KrenzelakSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1983
- Office of the Disciplinary Counsel v. CampbellSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1975
- Office of Disciplinary Counsel v. EilbergSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1982
- Office of Disciplinary Counsel v. DuffieldSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1994
- Office of Disciplinary Counsel v. CostiganSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1990
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by24 opinions
- Commonwealth v. BasemoreSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2000
- In re WongAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2000
- In Re IuloSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2001
- Schrankel v. Commonwealth, Department of TransportationSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2000
- In Re StampsSupreme Court of Louisiana · 2004
19 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.