Opinion · Palaw Pennsylvania

COHEN v. DISCIPLINARY BD., ETC., 494 Pa. 129 (1981)

Walter W. COHEN, Consumer Advoc., et al., Appellants, v. TheDISCIPLINARY Bd. OF the SUPREME COURT OF Pa., 430 A.2d 1151 (Pa. 1981)

Type: Opinion
Court: Palaw Pennsylvania
Jurisdiction: Palaw
Date: 1981-06-04
Topic: general

COHEN v. DISCIPLINARY BD., ETC., 494 Pa. 129 (1981) 430 A.2d 1151 Walter W. COHEN, Consumer Advocate, et al., Appellants, v. TheDISCIPLINARY BOARD OF the SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA et al.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania.Argued May 20, 1981. Decided June 4, 1981.

Citator

UpLaw has not yet analyzed COHEN v. DISCIPLINARY BD., ETC., 494 Pa. 129 (1981). The absence of a flag is not a finding that it is good law.

COHEN v. DISCIPLINARY BD., ETC.,494 Pa. 129(1981)

430 A.2d 1151

Walter W. COHEN, Consumer Advocate, et al., Appellants, v. The

DISCIPLINARY BOARD OF the SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA et al.

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania.

Argued May 20, 1981.

Decided June 4, 1981.

Appeal No. 80-2-322, from Order of Commonwealth Court at No. 881 C.D. 1979; Genevieve Blatt, Judge.Page 130

Walter W. Cohen, Consumer Advocate, Daniel Clearfield, Asst. Consumer Advocate, Harrisburg, for appellants.

Allen B. Zerfoss, Harrisburg, Charles W. Johns, Howland W. Abramson, Philadelphia, for appellees.

Before ROBERTS, NIX, LARSEN, FLAHERTY and KAUFFMAN, JJ.

OPINION

PER CURIAM:

Order affirmed.

O'BRIEN, C. J., and WILKINSON, J., did not participate in the consideration or decision of this case.