 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to DUI Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
In re Turman11/14/2003
has done virtually nothing of substance to demonstrate his competence and fitness as a lawyer is evidence against his reinstatement at this time.
The Board recommends that the Petition for Reinstatement be denied.
V. RECOMMENDATION
The Disciplinary Board of the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania unanimously recommends that Petitioner, David Wayne Turman, be denied reinstatement to the practice of law.
The Board further recommends that, pursuant to Rule 218(e), Pa.R.D.E., Petitioner be directed to pay the necessary expenses incurred in the investigation and processing of the Petition for Reinstatement.
Respectfully submitted,
THE DISCIPLINARY BOARD OF THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA
Laurence H. Brown, Member
Date: August 21, 2003
Board Member Sheerer did not participate in the May 14, 2003 adjudication.
AND NOW, this 14th day of November, 2003, upon consideration of the Report and Recommendations of the Disciplinary Board of the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania dated August 21, 2003, the Petition for Reinstatement is DENIED.
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."
|