Legal Opinion

Office of Disciplinary Counsel v. Chung

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania

Decided May 20, 1997PublishedCited by 28 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION OF THE COURT

NEWMAN, Justice.

Respondent Daniel W. Chung has filed exceptions to the Disciplinary Board’s report recommending his disbarment.

On August 24, 1994, this Court temporarily suspended Respondent from practice based on his July 15, 1993 guilty plea in federal court on five counts of making false statements to a federally insured financial institution1. Because of his convictions, the District Court imposed concurrent sentences of twelve months and one day for each count and ordered Respondent to pay restitution in the amount of $106,000.00, along with a fine and assessment…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Office of Disciplinary Counsel v. LucariniSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1983
  2. Office of Disciplinary Counsel v. HolstonSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1993
  3. Office of Disciplinary Counsel v. RaifordSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1997

3Cited by28 opinions

  1. Office of Disciplinary Counsel v. KiesewetterSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2005
  2. Office of Disciplinary Counsel v. PriceSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1999
  3. Office of Disciplinary Counsel v. MonsourSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1997
  4. Office of Disciplinary Counsel v. ValentinoSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1999
  5. In re MelograneSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2005

23 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API