# In Re Iulo

> Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · February 20, 2001 · 564 Pa. 205

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9727128

## Case

- **Full name:** In the Matter of Dennis J. IULO
- **Court:** Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
- **Decided:** February 20, 2001
- **Citations:** 564 Pa. 205; 766 A.2d 335; 2001 Pa. LEXIS 372
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Concurrence by Nigro
- **Judges:** Flaherty, Zappala, Cappy, Castille, Nigro, Newman, Saylor
- **Cited by:** 48 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/9727128

## Opinion text

NIGRO, Justice,
concurring.
I agree with the majority that reciprocal discipline in the instant case would be a grave injustice. I write separately, however, because I do not believe that Pa.R.B.A. 203 should have been amended to create a bright line rule that prohibits attorneys who have been disbarred or suspended for disciplinary reasons in other states from applying to sit for the Pennsylvania bar exam. Historically, this Court has taken the position that the events surrounding each particular case of *219 attorney misconduct must be taken into account when determining the appropriate discipline. See Office of Disciplinary Counsel v. Valentino, 556 Pa. 609 , 730 A.2d 479, 481 (1999). The amendment of Pa.R.B.A. 203 ignores this long-standing dictate in disciplinary proceedings. Furthermore, two of our neighboring states, New Jersey and Ohio, offer no opportunity for anyone who has ever been disbarred to petition for reinstatement. Consequently, decisions to disbar attorneys in those states will permanently preclude those attorneys from applying to sit for the Pennsylvania bar, or from petitioning for reinstatement to the Pennsylvania bar, regardless of the circumstances surrounding their misconduct. For these reasons, Pa.R.B.A. 203 should not, in my view, have been amended.

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9727128. Public record. Not legal advice.