A federal appeals court has ruled that an attorney was properly suspended by the Pennsylvania Supreme Court from the practice of law due to accusations against two judges overseeing a 2010 workers compensation matter.
In a Tuesday decision, the U.S. Third Circuit Court of Appeals found that attorney Robert Murphy’s law license was properly suspended in Pennsylvania for five years and that a doctrine known as “reciprocal discipline,” or similar discipline in another jurisdiction, was appropriately applied.
The U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania imposed reciprocal discipline after the state courts suspended Mr. Murphy from practicing law.
The disciplinary action came after Mr. Murphy accused two workers comp judges of improperly communicating with opposing counsel without his involvement, known as “ex parte” communications.
Mr. Murphy sought to have the two comp judges recuse themselves from hearing the comp case, in which he represented the claimant.
Pennsylvania’s Office of Disciplinary Counsel informed Mr. Murphy in 2012 that he was facing a complaint relating to his “purportedly false allegations of ex parte communications” against the comp judges.
The federal appeals court ruled that Mr. Murphy’s due process rights weren’t violated during the disciplinary proceedings and that the imposition of reciprocal discipline was not a “grave injustice.”
The court further reiterated that Mr. Murphy’s accusations of judicial misconduct were baseless.