MATTER OF PERRINO, 538 Pa. 179 (1994)

647 A.2d 211

In the Matter of Perry C. PERRINO.

No. 668, Disciplinary Docket No. 2. No. 3 DB 89 Disciplinary Board.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania.
August 24, 1994.

PETITION FOR REINSTATEMENT ORDER
PER CURIAM:

AND NOW, this 24th day of August, 1994, upon consideration of the Report and Recommendations of the Disciplinary Board of the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania dated July 18, 1994, the Petition for Reinstatement is granted.

Page 180

Pursuant to Rule 218(e), Pa.R.D.E., petitioner is directed to pay the expenses incurred by the Board in the investigation and processing of the Petition for Reinstatement.

ZAPPALA and MONTEMURO, JJ., did not participate in this matter.

jdjungle

Share
Published by
jdjungle
Tags: 647 A.2d 211

Recent Posts

COMMONWEALTH v. ALEXANDER, 243 A.3d 177 (2020)

243 A.3d 177 (2020) COMMONWEALTH of Pennsylvania, Appellee v. Keith ALEXANDER, Appellant. No. 30 EAP…

8 months ago

BODAN v. FICKETT, 24 Pa. D. & C. 3d 115 (1982)

24 Pa. D. & C. 3d 115 (1982) Bodan v. Fickett No. 2726 Civil 1981.Common…

2 years ago

IRWIN v. BANK OF THE UNITED STATES, 1 Pa. 349 (1845)

Irwin v. Bank of the United States, 1 Pa. 349 (1845) Sept. 1845 · Supreme Court of…

5 years ago

DURST v. MILROY GENERAL CONTRACTING, INC., 52 A.3d 357 (2012)

52 A.3d 357 (2012) Maureen DURST and Scott Durst, Appellants v. MILROY GENERAL CONTRACTING, INC.…

7 years ago

COMMONWEALTH v. SISTRUNK, 460 Pa. 655 (1975)

334 A.2d 280 COMMONWEALTH of Pennsylvania v. Edward SISTRUNK a/k/a Edward Brooks, Appellant. COMMONWEALTH of…

9 years ago

McINTYRE ET AL. v. POPE ET AL., 326 Pa. 172 (1937)

191 A. 607 McIntyre et al., Appellants, v. Pope et al.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania.March 25,…

9 years ago