# Office of Disciplinary Counsel v. Levine

> Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · April 27, 2005 · 582 Pa. 459

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9648652

## Case

- **Full name:** OFFICE OF DISCIPLINARY COUNSEL, Petitioner v. Barry Franklin LEVINE, Respondent
- **Court:** Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
- **Decided:** April 27, 2005
- **Citations:** 582 Pa. 459; 872 A.2d 1138; 2005 Pa. LEXIS 901
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Dissent by Cappy
- **Judges:** Cappy, Nigro, Newman, Saylor, Eakin, Baer, Castille
- **Cited by:** 0 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases.
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9648652

## Opinion text

Chief Justice CAPPY
dissenting.
I respectfully dissent from the majority’s imposition of a suspension for a period of five years, and would disbar Respondent. Initially, I note that Respondent has failed to satisfy his burden of demonstrating that his psychiatric disorder was a substantial causal factor in his misconduct pursuant to Office of Disciplinary Counsel v. Braun, 520 Pa. 157 , 553 A.2d 894 (1989). The nature of his misconduct—affixing a judge’s signature to an order approving the settlement of a claim and submitting the same to an insurance carrier—is of the most egregious nature. Respondent further attempted to conceal his misconduct by filing a motion with the court in which he falsely asserted that the trial judge had signed the order, but that the order had been inadvertently misplaced. Under these circumstances, where the very nature of the legal *461 process has been compromised, the appropriate sanction is disbarment.
Justice SAYLOR joins this dissenting statement.

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9648652. Public record. Not legal advice.