Opinion · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Office of Disciplinary Counsel v. Baumhammers
Off. of Disciplinary Counsel v. Baumhammers, 752 A.2d 401 (Pa. 2000)
- Type
- Opinion
- Court
- Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
- Jurisdiction
- Pennsylvania
- Date
- 2000-06-01
- Topic
- general
OFFICE OF DISCIPLINARY COUNSEL, Petitioner, v. Richard Scott BAUMHAMMERS, Respondent. No. 598 Disciplinary Docket No. 3. Supreme Court of Pennsylvania. June 1, 2000.
Citator
UpLaw has not yet analyzed Office of Disciplinary Counsel v. Baumhammers. The absence of a flag is not a finding that it is good law.
- Cited by
- 2 opinions
OFFICE OF DISCIPLINARY COUNSEL, Petitioner, v. Richard Scott BAUMHAMMERS, Respondent.
No. 598 Disciplinary Docket No. 3.
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania.
June 1, 2000.
ORDER
AND NOW, this 1st day of June, 2000, an Order and Rule to Show Cause having been entered by this Court on May 16, 2000, and upon consideration of the response filed, it is hereby ORDERED that:
1. The Rule is made absolute and respondent is placed on temporary suspension until further definitive action by this Court;
2. Respondent shall comply with the provisions of Rule 217, Pa.R.D.E.;
3. The President Judge of the Court of Common Pleas of Allegheny County, in accordance with Rule 217, Pa.R.D.E., shall take such further action and make such further orders as may appear necessary to protect the rights and interests of respondent’s clients; and
4. All financial institutions in which respondent holds fiduciary funds shall freeze such accounts pending further Order of this Court.
This Order constitutes an imposition of public discipline within the meaning of Rule 402, Pa.R.D.E., pertaining to confidentiality.