From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

In re Amendment of Rule 221

SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA
Dec 1, 2017
DISCIPLINARY RULES DOCKET NO.155 (Pa. Dec. 1, 2017)

Opinion

DISCIPLINARY RULES DOCKET NO.155

12-01-2017

IN RE: AMENDMENT OF RULE 221 OF THE PENNSYLVANIA RULES OF DISCIPLINARY ENFORCEMENT


ORDER

AND NOW, this 1st day of December, 2017, upon the recommendation of the Disciplinary Board of the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania; the proposal having been published for public comment in the Pennsylvania Bulletin, 47 Pa.B. 3490 (June 24, 2017):

IT IS ORDERED pursuant to Article V, Section 10 of the Constitution of Pennsylvania that Rule 211 of the Pennsylvania Rules of Disciplinary Enforcement is amended in the attached form.

This ORDER shall be processed in accordance with Pa.R.J.A. No. 103(b), and shall be effective in 30 days. Material to be added is bolded and underlined.
Material to be deleted is bolded and in brackets Rule 221. Funds of clients and third persons. Mandatory overdraft notification. ***

(h) An Eligible Institution shall be approved as a depository for Trust Accounts of attorneys if it shall be in compliance with applicable provisions of Rule 1.15 of the Pennsylvania Rules of Professional Conduct and the Regulations of the IOLTA Board and shall file with the Disciplinary Board an agreement [(]in a form [provided] approved by the Board[)] to comply with IOLTA Regulations governing approved Eligible Institutions and to make a prompt report to the Lawyers Fund for Client Security Board whenever any check or similar instrument is presented against a Trust Account when such account contains insufficient funds to pay the instrument, regardless of

(1) whether the instrument is honored, or

(2) whether funds are subsequently deposited that cover the overdraft or the dishonored instrument is made good.
***

(k) A failure on the part of an Eligible Institution to make a report to the Lawyers Fund for Client Security Board called for by this rule or to comply with IOLTA Regulations governing approved Eligible Institutions may be cause for termination of approval by the Supreme Court, but such failure shall not, absent gross negligence, give rise to a cause of action, by any person who is proximately caused harm thereby. * * *


Summaries of

In re Amendment of Rule 221

SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA
Dec 1, 2017
DISCIPLINARY RULES DOCKET NO.155 (Pa. Dec. 1, 2017)
Case details for

In re Amendment of Rule 221

Case Details

Full title:IN RE: AMENDMENT OF RULE 221 OF THE PENNSYLVANIA RULES OF DISCIPLINARY…

Court:SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

Date published: Dec 1, 2017

Citations

DISCIPLINARY RULES DOCKET NO.155 (Pa. Dec. 1, 2017)