Update From the Disciplinary Board of the Supreme Court of PA:

He has really managed to drag this process out. But he specializes in legal procrastination and postponement. Why am I surprised?

From the Birther Calendar:

Hmmmm. Will the hearing really happen, or will Phil find a way to postpone it again?

Disbar his ass.

Taitz should show up. I'm sure Berg will return the favor when it is her turn.

I am blissfully out of the country until next week.

http://www.orlytaitzesq.com/?p=134523

http://www.orlytaitzesq.com/?p=190897

Gawd, I HOPE SO!

The "verdict" is in on Phil's discipline...

I guess the plaintiff's in Liberi v Tatiz are going to have to find legal representation. Or represent themselves.

That's all?

That's all that's on the public docket. I got lucky and must have checked almost at the time it was posted as he's still listed as "Active". That's not been changed.

No financial penalties were posted.

I'm sure Orly will be jumping up and down with glee soon, if not already.

The sad part is she should have had one at least 3 times that long, long ago, along with taking ethics classes, and being supervised for some period of time thereafter. If she practiced thereafter as an "attorney".

So much for that pro hoc vice application.

This could work in Liberi's favor if she decides to hire a competent attorney.

It is a win-win situation. Berg is finally shown to be a buffoon and the real victim(s) of Taitz in the Liberi vs Taitz case will get better representation. Provided she/they do not choose the Putz or the Paraclete.

Unless he tries his luck in California.

No competent attorney is going to touch this dog of a case now.
If they proceed I suspect it'll be pro se, most likely with Lisa doing the legal work.

Too bad it's already FUBAR or Lisa might have prevailed on part of her claims.

That is probably not the final verdict - it is only the hearing committee report.

I don't have stats for how often the hearing committee's recommendations are accepted, but I believe there may be two more levels of consideration - the hearing committee recommends action to the Disciplinary Board which makes a determination about discipline, and then the Board's recommendations are acted upon by the Supreme Court.

I've actually been reading a couple of disciplinary opinions today (in matters unrelated to Phil Berg). They are styled as "Report and Recommendations of the Disciplinary Board of the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania" and are addressed to the Justices of the Supreme Court. Attached to each opinion is the Supreme Court order imposing discipline. There is a gap of several months between the date on the report and the date of the order (which is the date shown on the Disciplinary Board website for the disciplinary action taken).

The opinions I am reading are older (1998 & 2002) and don't show all of the docket entries involved in the discipline process so I can't compare with Berg's docket. These opinions are actually redacted, including the name of the attorney being disciplined, but under the new rules all published opinions can be found on the website and linked to the attorney.

I work with a hearing officer, so if I get a chance tomorrow I will check on the process with her.

Thanks, xKat.

That may also be why "Active" is still the indicator.

It does indeed state it is the committee hearing report...

That may be the rule in Arizona, but I don't think it is the rule in PA.

The cases I was reading today involved an attorney who was disbarred on consent. He was eligible to apply for reinstatement, but had to wait 5 years after disbarment. There was nothing in the opinions about having to retake the bar exam, although there was a finding of fact regarding his compliance with required CLE credits (including make-up credits for the years he was disbarred).

So where does that put him in "The worst atty in the world" stakes? By one measure, he's ahead. On the other hand, it leaves the field open for ... what's her name? The one that hasn't been disbarred yet ...

http://www.orlytaitzesq.com/?p=207858

You guessed it!



Then she has the docket splayed all over the front page, as usual. She probably stole it from you.

HEY ORLY, YOU MIGHT BE NEXT!

Just for the fun, I'd like to see her appeals in CA get denied and the case get moving again. With Berg showing up in CA before court while he is still active. Just to see one constitutional attorney shreek about not being allowed to practice....