Office of Disciplinary Counsel v. Surrick

OPINION

CAPPY, Justice.

This court is presented with the question of whether the evidence was sufficient to establish respondent’s culpability on two charges that he violated Rule of Professional Conduct 8.4(c) 1 (hereinafter RPC). The precise issue to be resolved is whether respondent acted with reckless disregard for the truth when he leveled accusations of case fixing against certain jurists in a pleading filed in the Superior Court of Pennsylvania. For the reasons set forth herein, we find that respondent did violate RPC 8.4(c) on both counts and that the appropriate discipline is a five…