In re Berg (Pa. bar)

User avatar
realist
Posts: 34969
Joined: Fri Jan 23, 2009 12:33 pm

In re Berg (Pa. bar)

#76

Post by realist » Wed Dec 21, 2011 7:24 am

Update From the Disciplinary Board of the Supreme Court of PA:





Attorney ID: 9867





Philip J. Berg


PENDING PROCEEDINGS


PETITION FOR DISCIPLINE


DB No. Date Description Effective


208 DB 2010 10/18/2010





PETITION FOR DISCIPLINE FILED








208 DB 2010 12/13/2010


ANSWER TO PETITION FOR DISCIPLINE FILED


BY RESPONDENT





208 DB 2010 12/17/2010


HEARING SCHEDULED


(02/23/2011), 09:30 AM DISTRICT II





208 DB 2010 12/17/2010


PETITION REFERRED TO HEARING COMMITTEE


BARRETT, MALLON, SANTARELLI





208 DB 2010 03/02/2011


HEARING RESCHEDULED


(04/07/2011), 09:30 AM, DISTRICT II





208 DB 2010 05/06/2011


HEARING CONTINUED


(05/25/2011), 09:30 AM, DISTRICT II





208 DB 2010 08/24/2011


POST- HEARING CONFERENCE SCHEDULED


(09/19/2011), 02:00 PM, DISTRICT II





208 DB 2010 10/27/2011


ADDITIONAL HEARING SCHEDULED


(11/23/2011), 09:30 AM, DISTRICT II





208 DB 2010 12/05/2011


[highlight]HEARING CONTINUED[/highlight]


(02/10/2012), 09:30 AM, DISTRICT II


ImageX 4 ImageX36
Image

User avatar
LM K
Posts: 8290
Joined: Fri Jan 23, 2009 5:59 pm
Location: Oregon
Occupation: College Professor

In re Berg (Pa. bar)

#77

Post by LM K » Wed Dec 21, 2011 7:46 am

He has really managed to drag this process out. But he specializes in legal procrastination and postponement. Why am I surprised?


"The jungle is no place for a cello."
Take the Money and Run

User avatar
Reality Check
Posts: 15888
Joined: Fri Feb 20, 2009 8:09 pm
Location: USA
Contact:

In re Berg (Pa. bar)

#78

Post by Reality Check » Sun Feb 05, 2012 11:04 am

From the Birther Calendar:Phil Berg - State Bar Discipline HearingHearing continued from 11/23/2011. District IIWhen Fri Feb 10 9:30am – 10:30am Eastern TimeWhere Philadelphia PA (map)Calendar Birther Events


"“If you’re not outraged, you’re not paying attention.”

Heather Heyer, November 2016

User avatar
LM K
Posts: 8290
Joined: Fri Jan 23, 2009 5:59 pm
Location: Oregon
Occupation: College Professor

In re Berg (Pa. bar)

#79

Post by LM K » Mon Feb 06, 2012 7:23 am

Hmmmm. Will the hearing really happen, or will Phil find a way to postpone it again?Disbar his ass.


"The jungle is no place for a cello."
Take the Money and Run

User avatar
Sterngard Friegen
Posts: 45301
Joined: Wed Aug 05, 2009 12:32 am
Location: Over the drawbridge

In re Berg (Pa. bar)

#80

Post by Sterngard Friegen » Mon Feb 06, 2012 7:27 am

Hmmmm. Will the hearing really happen, or will Phil find a way to postpone it again?Disbar his ass.Taitz should show up. I'm sure Berg will return the favor when it is her turn.



User avatar
Res Ipsa
Posts: 2617
Joined: Wed Mar 18, 2009 1:31 am

In re Berg (Pa. bar)

#81

Post by Res Ipsa » Thu Feb 09, 2012 4:21 pm

I am blissfully out of the country until next week.


Thanks pal.

User avatar
bob
Posts: 27363
Joined: Sat Dec 05, 2009 12:22 pm

In re Berg (Pa. bar)

#82

Post by bob » Thu Jun 28, 2012 5:29 pm

Update: in the case of the Disciplinary board v attorney Philip Berg there was an extension until July 16th for the hearing committee to file their recommendation to the Disciplinary Board of the Supreme Court of PA :twisted: [/break1]orlytaitzesq.com/?p=134523]http://www.orlytaitzesq.com/?p=134523 :twisted:


Imagex6 Imagex2 Imagex4 Imagex2

User avatar
bob
Posts: 27363
Joined: Sat Dec 05, 2009 12:22 pm

In re Berg (Pa. bar)

#83

Post by bob » Wed Jul 18, 2012 6:17 pm

Update: The panel in Office of the Disciplinary Counsel of the Supreme Court of PA v Philip Berg got an extention till the end of July. [highlight]I wonder if someone is pulling the strings not to disbar or suspend Berg and to allow Berg and Kreep to harass me some more[/highlight] :twisted: [/break1]orlytaitzesq.com/?p=190897]http://www.orlytaitzesq.com/?p=190897 :twisted:


Imagex6 Imagex2 Imagex4 Imagex2

User avatar
SueDB
Posts: 27756
Joined: Thu Sep 30, 2010 2:02 pm
Location: RIP, my friend. - Foggy

In re Berg (Pa. bar)

#84

Post by SueDB » Wed Jul 18, 2012 6:18 pm

Update: The panel in Office of the Disciplinary Counsel of the Supreme Court of PA v Philip Berg got an extention till the end of July. [highlight]I wonder if someone is pulling the strings not to disbar or suspend Berg and to allow Berg and Kreep to harass me some more[/highlight] :twisted: [/break1]orlytaitzesq.com/?p=190897]http://www.orlytaitzesq.com/?p=190897 :twisted:

-xx Gawd, I HOPE SO! -xx


“If You're Not In The Obit, Eat Breakfast”

Remember, Orly NEVAH disappoints!

User avatar
realist
Posts: 34969
Joined: Fri Jan 23, 2009 12:33 pm

In re Berg (Pa. bar)

#85

Post by realist » Wed Aug 01, 2012 4:39 pm

The "verdict" is in on Phil's discipline...208 DB 2010 07/31/2012 HEARING COMMITTEE REPORT FILED[highlight]ONE YEAR AND ONE DAY SUSPENSION[/highlight]


ImageX 4 ImageX36
Image

User avatar
LM K
Posts: 8290
Joined: Fri Jan 23, 2009 5:59 pm
Location: Oregon
Occupation: College Professor

In re Berg (Pa. bar)

#86

Post by LM K » Wed Aug 01, 2012 4:42 pm

The "verdict" is in on Phil's discipline...208 DB 2010 07/31/2012 HEARING COMMITTEE REPORT FILED[highlight]ONE YEAR AND ONE DAY SUSPENSION[/highlight] :-bd I guess the plaintiff's in Liberi v Tatiz are going to have to find legal representation. Or represent themselves.
Edit: Are there any financial penalties?


"The jungle is no place for a cello."
Take the Money and Run

TexasFilly
Posts: 18670
Joined: Mon Sep 28, 2009 12:52 pm

In re Berg (Pa. bar)

#87

Post by TexasFilly » Wed Aug 01, 2012 4:48 pm

The "verdict" is in on Phil's discipline...208 DB 2010 07/31/2012 HEARING COMMITTEE REPORT FILED[highlight]ONE YEAR AND ONE DAY SUSPENSION[/highlight]That's all? :((


I love the poorly educated!!!

Kevin McCarthy: Paul Ryan playing with a head injury -- Jon Lovett

User avatar
realist
Posts: 34969
Joined: Fri Jan 23, 2009 12:33 pm

In re Berg (Pa. bar)

#88

Post by realist » Wed Aug 01, 2012 4:54 pm

The "verdict" is in on Phil's discipline...208 DB 2010 07/31/2012 HEARING COMMITTEE REPORT FILED[highlight]ONE YEAR AND ONE DAY SUSPENSION[/highlight]That's all? :((That's all that's on the public docket. I got lucky and must have checked almost at the time it was posted as he's still listed as "Active". That's not been changed.No financial penalties were posted.I'm sure Orly will be jumping up and down with glee soon, if not already. The sad part is she should have had one at least 3 times that long, long ago, along with taking ethics classes, and being supervised for some period of time thereafter. If she practiced thereafter as an "attorney".


ImageX 4 ImageX36
Image

User avatar
DaveMuckey
Posts: 4110
Joined: Tue Sep 08, 2009 3:17 pm

In re Berg (Pa. bar)

#89

Post by DaveMuckey » Wed Aug 01, 2012 4:56 pm

The "verdict" is in on Phil's discipline...





208 DB 2010 07/31/2012





HEARING COMMITTEE REPORT FILED





[highlight]ONE YEAR AND ONE DAY SUSPENSION[/highlight]So much for that pro hoc vice application.



User avatar
ZekeB
Posts: 16177
Joined: Mon Oct 12, 2009 10:07 pm
Location: Northwest part of Semi Blue State

In re Berg (Pa. bar)

#90

Post by ZekeB » Wed Aug 01, 2012 5:05 pm

This could work in Liberi's favor if she decides to hire a competent attorney.


Trump: Er hat eine größere Ente als ich.

Putin: Du bist kleiner als ich.

Paul Pieniezny
Posts: 1484
Joined: Fri Feb 20, 2009 8:42 am

In re Berg (Pa. bar)

#91

Post by Paul Pieniezny » Wed Aug 01, 2012 5:09 pm

The "verdict" is in on Phil's discipline...208 DB 2010 07/31/2012 HEARING COMMITTEE REPORT FILED[highlight]ONE YEAR AND ONE DAY SUSPENSION[/highlight] :-bd I guess the plaintiff's in Liberi v Tatiz are going to have to find legal representation. Or represent themselves.
Edit: Are there any financial penalties?
It is a win-win situation. Berg is finally shown to be a buffoon and the real victim(s) of Taitz in the Liberi vs Taitz case will get better representation. Provided she/they do not choose the Putz or the Paraclete.



Paul Pieniezny
Posts: 1484
Joined: Fri Feb 20, 2009 8:42 am

In re Berg (Pa. bar)

#92

Post by Paul Pieniezny » Wed Aug 01, 2012 5:10 pm

I remember from the AZ-case concerning the co-conspirator of Sheriff Joe that a suspension of more than 1 year requires to take the bar exam anew. Something Berg will never be able to ...Unless he tries his luck in California.



User avatar
realist
Posts: 34969
Joined: Fri Jan 23, 2009 12:33 pm

In re Berg (Pa. bar)

#93

Post by realist » Wed Aug 01, 2012 5:14 pm

It is a win-win situation. Berg is finally shown to be a buffoon and the real victim(s) of Taitz in the Liberi vs Taitz case will get better representation. Provided she/they do not choose the Putz or the Paraclete.No competent attorney is going to touch this dog of a case now.If they proceed I suspect it'll be pro se, most likely with Lisa doing the legal work.Too bad it's already FUBAR or Lisa might have prevailed on part of her claims.


ImageX 4 ImageX36
Image

xKat
Posts: 537
Joined: Fri Jan 23, 2009 10:06 pm

In re Berg (Pa. bar)

#94

Post by xKat » Wed Aug 01, 2012 5:14 pm

That is probably not the final verdict - it is only the hearing committee report. I don't have stats for how often the hearing committee's recommendations are accepted, but I believe there may be two more levels of consideration - the hearing committee recommends action to the Disciplinary Board which makes a determination about discipline, and then the Board's recommendations are acted upon by the Supreme Court.I've actually been reading a couple of disciplinary opinions today (in matters unrelated to Phil Berg). They are styled as "Report and Recommendations of the Disciplinary Board of the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania" and are addressed to the Justices of the Supreme Court. Attached to each opinion is the Supreme Court order imposing discipline. There is a gap of several months between the date on the report and the date of the order (which is the date shown on the Disciplinary Board website for the disciplinary action taken).The opinions I am reading are older (1998 & 2002) and don't show all of the docket entries involved in the discipline process so I can't compare with Berg's docket. These opinions are actually redacted, including the name of the attorney being disciplined, but under the new rules all published opinions can be found on the website and linked to the attorney.I work with a hearing officer, so if I get a chance tomorrow I will check on the process with her.


If we amplify everything,
we hear nothing.

Jon Stewart
10/30/2010

User avatar
realist
Posts: 34969
Joined: Fri Jan 23, 2009 12:33 pm

In re Berg (Pa. bar)

#95

Post by realist » Wed Aug 01, 2012 5:18 pm

Thanks, xKat.That may also be why "Active" is still the indicator.It does indeed state it is the committee hearing report...208 DB 2010 07/31/2012 [highlight]HEARING COMMITTEE REPORT FILED[/highlight]ONE YEAR AND ONE DAY SUSPENSION


ImageX 4 ImageX36
Image

xKat
Posts: 537
Joined: Fri Jan 23, 2009 10:06 pm

In re Berg (Pa. bar)

#96

Post by xKat » Wed Aug 01, 2012 5:18 pm

I remember from the AZ-case concerning the co-conspirator of Sheriff Joe that a suspension of more than 1 year requires to take the bar exam anew. Something Berg will never be able to ...That may be the rule in Arizona, but I don't think it is the rule in PA. The cases I was reading today involved an attorney who was disbarred on consent. He was eligible to apply for reinstatement, but had to wait 5 years after disbarment. There was nothing in the opinions about having to retake the bar exam, although there was a finding of fact regarding his compliance with required CLE credits (including make-up credits for the years he was disbarred).


If we amplify everything,
we hear nothing.

Jon Stewart
10/30/2010

tjh
Posts: 2943
Joined: Wed Oct 07, 2009 4:18 pm

In re Berg (Pa. bar)

#97

Post by tjh » Wed Aug 01, 2012 5:34 pm

So where does that put him in "The worst atty in the world" stakes? By one measure, he's ahead. On the other hand, it leaves the field open for ... what's her name? The one that hasn't been disbarred yet ...



User avatar
bob
Posts: 27363
Joined: Sat Dec 05, 2009 12:22 pm

In re Berg (Pa. bar)

#98

Post by bob » Wed Aug 01, 2012 5:46 pm

Philip Berg who together with Gary Kreep is harassing me and investigator Neil Sankey, has been suspended from practicing law for one year and one day. See below :twisted: [/break1]orlytaitzesq.com/?p=207858]http://www.orlytaitzesq.com/?p=207858 :twisted:


Imagex6 Imagex2 Imagex4 Imagex2

TexasFilly
Posts: 18670
Joined: Mon Sep 28, 2009 12:52 pm

In re Berg (Pa. bar)

#99

Post by TexasFilly » Wed Aug 01, 2012 5:49 pm







That's all? :((That's all that's on the public docket. I got lucky and must have checked almost at the time it was posted as he's still listed as "Active". That's not been changed.





No financial penalties were posted.





[highlight]I'm sure Orly will be jumping up and down with glee soon, if not already.[/highlight]





The sad part is she should have had one at least 3 times that long, long ago, along with taking ethics classes, and being supervised for some period of time thereafter. If she practiced thereafter as an "attorney".You guessed it!





Philip Berg who together with Gary Kreep is harassing me and investigator Neil Sankey, has been suspended from practicing law for one year and one day. See below





Posted on | August 1, 2012 | No CommentsThen she has the docket splayed all over the front page, as usual. She probably stole it from you.





HEY ORLY, YOU MIGHT BE NEXT!


I love the poorly educated!!!

Kevin McCarthy: Paul Ryan playing with a head injury -- Jon Lovett

User avatar
RTH10260
Posts: 22666
Joined: Tue Mar 02, 2010 8:52 am
Location: Near the Swiss Alps

In re Berg (Pa. bar)

#100

Post by RTH10260 » Wed Aug 01, 2012 6:05 pm

Philip Berg who together with Gary Kreep is harassing me and investigator Neil Sankey, has been suspended from practicing law for one year and one day. See below :twisted: [/break1]orlytaitzesq.com/?p=207858]http://www.orlytaitzesq.com/?p=207858 :twisted:Just for the fun, I'd like to see her appeals in CA get denied and the case get moving again. With Berg showing up in CA before court while he is still active. Just to see one constitutional attorney shreek about not being allowed to practice.... :P



Post Reply

Return to “Phil Berg”