Office of Disciplinary Counsel v. Surrick
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION OF THE COURT
FLAHERTY, Justice.
In this appeal we are asked to review an order of the Disciplinary Board of this Court directing that attorney Robert B. Surrick be subjected to a private reprimand. The pertinent facts are as follows.
In 1980, then Mr. Chief Justice Henry X. O’Brien directed the Judicial Inquiry and Review Board (hereinafter JIRB) to conduct an investigation upon charges that Mr. Justice Larsen had engaged in certain improprieties. Hearings were held over a two year period, after which the members of the JIRB were in disagreement as to whether Mr. Justice Larsen should be…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- The First Amendment Coalition, Frederick J. Huysman and Daniel R. Biddle, in 84-1164 v. Judicial Inquiry and Review Board, in 84-1153Court of Appeals for the First Circuit · 1986
- First Amendment Coalition v. Judicial Inquiry & Review BoardSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1983
- First Amendment Coalition v. Judicial Inquiry & Review BoardDistrict Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 1984
- Application of SurrickSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1983
3Cited by10 opinions
- Matter of LarsenSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1992
- P.J.S. v. Pennsylvania State Ethics CommissionCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 1996
- Office of Disciplinary Counsel v. SurrickSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2000
- Office of Disciplinary Counsel v. JepsenSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2002
- Office of Disciplinary Counsel v. Anonymous Attorney ASupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1991
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.