From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

SCF Consulting, LLC v. Barrack, Rodos & Bacine

SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA EASTERN DISTRICT
Feb 1, 2017
165 A.3d 903 (Pa. 2017)

Opinion

No. 347 EAL 2016

02-01-2017

SCF CONSULTING, LLC, Petitioner v. BARRACK, RODOS & BACINE, Respondent


ORDER

PER CURIAM.

AND NOW, this 1st day of February, 2017, the Petition for Allowance of Appeal is GRANTED, LIMITED TO the issue set forth below. Allocatur is DENIED as to all remaining issues. The issue, as stated by Petitioner, is:

Whether the Trial Court and Superior Court erred in sustaining [Respondent's] demurrer to all [c]ounts of [Petitioner's] Complaint, where, even assuming arguendo that the Compensation Plan was in violation of R.P.C. 5.4, Pennsylvania law, public policy and the interests of justice require such an agreement to be enforced because an attorney must not be shielded from liability, nor financially rewarded for violating the Rules of Professional Conduct[?]

Justice Mundy did not participate in the consideration or decision of this matter.


Summaries of

SCF Consulting, LLC v. Barrack, Rodos & Bacine

SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA EASTERN DISTRICT
Feb 1, 2017
165 A.3d 903 (Pa. 2017)
Case details for

SCF Consulting, LLC v. Barrack, Rodos & Bacine

Case Details

Full title:SCF CONSULTING, LLC, Petitioner v. BARRACK, RODOS & BACINE, Respondent

Court:SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA EASTERN DISTRICT

Date published: Feb 1, 2017

Citations

165 A.3d 903 (Pa. 2017)