In Re Larsen
Court of Judicial Discipline of Pennsylvania
1ConcurrenceByer, Judge
Although I have some doubt concerning the issue discussed in part II of this opinion, I concur in the result.
I
I cannot join the majority opinion to the extent it holds that the mootness doctrine “is applicable to the imposition of sanctions only.” Majority opinion at 46. By reasoning *49from that incorrect premise, the majority erroneously concludes that this case would not be moot even if the Board elects not to seek a sanction limiting Respondent’s ability to practice law.
A
Where, because of changed circumstances, a judicial remedy no longer will affect the status of the parties, the case must…
2Cases cited10 opinions
- DeFunis v. OdegaardSupreme Court of the United States · 1974
- In re GreenbergSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1971
- Judicial Inquiry & Review Board v. SnyderSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1987
- Kuriger v. CramerSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1985
- Matter of GlanceySupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1988
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.