From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Office of Dis. v. Hall

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Dec 14, 2006
No. 1204 Disciplinary Docket No. 3 (Pa. Dec. 14, 2006)

Summary

In Office of Disciplinary Counsel v. Cary Bartlow Hall, No. 80 DB 2006 (Pa. 2006), Mr. Hall consented to a suspension of 18 months after admitting that his sworn testimony before a referee in an unemployment compensation matter was false and perjurious.

Summary of this case from Office of Disciplinary Counsel v. Hindman

Opinion

No. 1204 Disciplinary Docket No. 3.

December 14, 2006.

No. 1204 Disciplinary Docket No. 3, Attorney Registration No. 85747, (Montgomery County).


ORDER


AND NOW, this 14th day of December, 2006, upon consideration of the Recommendation of the Three-Member Panel of the Disciplinary Board dated September 25, 2006, the Joint Petition in Support of Discipline on Consent is hereby granted pursuant to Rule 215(g), Pa.R.D.E., and it is

ORDERED that Cary Bartlow Hall is suspended on consent from the Bar of this Commonwealth for a period of eighteen months, and he shall comply with all the provisions of Rule 217, Pa.R.D.E.


Summaries of

Office of Dis. v. Hall

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Dec 14, 2006
No. 1204 Disciplinary Docket No. 3 (Pa. Dec. 14, 2006)

In Office of Disciplinary Counsel v. Cary Bartlow Hall, No. 80 DB 2006 (Pa. 2006), Mr. Hall consented to a suspension of 18 months after admitting that his sworn testimony before a referee in an unemployment compensation matter was false and perjurious.

Summary of this case from Office of Disciplinary Counsel v. Hindman
Case details for

Office of Dis. v. Hall

Case Details

Full title:OFFICE OF DISCIPLINARY COUNSEL, Petitioner v. CARY BARTLOW HALL, Respondent

Court:Supreme Court of Pennsylvania

Date published: Dec 14, 2006

Citations

No. 1204 Disciplinary Docket No. 3 (Pa. Dec. 14, 2006)

Citing Cases

Office of Disciplinary Counsel v. Hindman

Cases warranting suspension have involved more egregious acts before the court. In Office of Disciplinary…

Friends of Animals v. Jewell

Feld, 659 F.3d at 24. Here, just as in Friends of Animals v. Salazar, the plaintiff claims that the…