The Court of Judicial Discipline’s decision Thursday to deny all parties in Pennsylvania Supreme Court Justice J. Michael Eakin’s disciplinary case the opportunity to present a proposed resolution left ethics attorneys wondering what led the court to change its mind on mediation. Earlier this month, the court had appointed attorney Richard Sprague to mediate the case upon a request from the parties for help reaching a settlement.

By preventing Eakin and the Judicial Conduct Board, which has charged the suspended justice with four ethics violations, from sharing their agreement with the court, Judge Jack Panella put the case back on track for trial beginning March 29 in Philadelphia.

This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.

To view this content, please continue to their sites.

Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now

Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now

Why am I seeing this?

LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law are third party online distributors of the broad collection of current and archived versions of ALM's legal news publications. LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law customers are able to access and use ALM's content, including content from the National Law Journal, The American Lawyer, Legaltech News, The New York Law Journal, and Corporate Counsel, as well as other sources of legal information.

For questions call 1-877-256-2472 or contact us at [email protected]