Legal Opinion

Office of Disciplinary Counsel v. Bentivegna

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania

Decided November 21, 2006No. Disciplinary Board Docket no. 88 D.B. 2005Published

1Opinion of the Court

To the Honorable Chief Justice and Justices of the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania:

O’CONNOR, Member,

— Pursuant to Rule 208(d)(2)(iii) of the Pennsylvania Rules of Disciplinary Enforcement, the Disciplinary Board of the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania herewith submits its *196findings and recommendations to your honorable court with respect to the above-captioned petition for discipline.

I. HISTORY OF PROCEEDINGS

On June 10,2005, Office of Disciplinary Counsel filed a petition for discipline against Antoinette M.J. Bentivegna, respondent. The petition charged respondent with professional misconduct…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Office of Disciplinary Counsel v. GrigsbySupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1981
  2. Office of Disciplinary Counsel v. SurrickSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2000
  3. Office of Disciplinary Counsel v. HolstonSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1993
  4. Office of Disciplinary Counsel v. RaifordSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1997

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

Powered by the Exa API