Narrative Opinion Summary
John E. Callaghan is disbarred from practicing law in Pennsylvania, effective May 22, 2000. This decision follows his disbarment by the Supreme Court of New Jersey on December 27, 1999. Callaghan was directed on March 23, 2000, to submit any claims against the imposition of similar disciplinary action in Pennsylvania, but he failed to respond. Consequently, he must comply with all requirements of Rule 217 of the Pennsylvania Rules of Disciplinary Enforcement (Pa.R.D.E.).
Legal Issues Addressed
Compliance with Disciplinary Rules Post-Disbarmentsubscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: Following disbarment, the attorney is required to comply with specific rules set forth by the jurisdiction's disciplinary body.
Reasoning: Consequently, he must comply with all requirements of Rule 217 of the Pennsylvania Rules of Disciplinary Enforcement (Pa.R.D.E.).
Opportunity to Contest Disciplinary Actionsubscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: The attorney was given the opportunity to contest the imposition of reciprocal discipline but failed to respond, leading to the enforcement of disbarment in Pennsylvania.
Reasoning: Callaghan was directed on March 23, 2000, to submit any claims against the imposition of similar disciplinary action in Pennsylvania, but he failed to respond.
Reciprocal Disbarmentsubscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: The principle of reciprocal disbarment is applied in this case, where an attorney disbarred in one jurisdiction is subsequently disbarred in another jurisdiction without contesting the action.
Reasoning: John E. Callaghan is disbarred from practicing law in Pennsylvania, effective May 22, 2000. This decision follows his disbarment by the Supreme Court of New Jersey on December 27, 1999.