Kennedy's Disbarment
Kennedy's Disbarment
Opinion of the Court
One of the specifications challenges the correctness of the decree of June 22,1895, striking appellant’s name from the roll of attorneys admitted to practice in the several courts of Lancaster county; the other complains of the decree of June 27, 1896, dismissing his petition to revoke the former decree.
The first decree was clearly warranted by the facts then before the court and upon which it appears to have acted. The facts subsequently presented were insufficient to entitle appellant to the revocation prayed for. We find nothing in the record that would justify a reversal or modification of either, decree; nor do we think there is anything in the specifications of error that requires discussion. They are both dismissed.
Decree affirmed and appeal dismissed at appellant’s costs.
Reference
- Full Case Name
- George C. Kennedy's Disbarment. George C. Kennedy's Appeal
- Cited By
- 8 cases
- Status
- Published
- Syllabus
- Attorneys at law — Disbarment—Insanity. On a rule to disbar an attorney at law who has been guilty of embezzlement, the defense of insanity will not be considered as established where the only testimony on the subject is that of the respondent’s physician, whose testimony is weakened by the positive evidence of other reputable witnesses that lie had employed the respondent to attend to legal business about the time of the embezzlement, and that he had said subsequently, when interrogated particularly with reference to the respondent’s jieeuliarities and mental condition, that he was of sound mind. The disbarment of an attorney at law for embezzlement will not be revoked because the respondent was acquitted in the criminal court of the charge of embezzlement, on the ground of insanity, and was committed to an insane asylum and subsequently discharged as cured.