
    OFFICE OF DISCIPLINARY COUNSEL, Petitioner, v. ANONYMOUS ATTORNEY, Respondent.
    No. 449 Disciplinary Docket No. 3.
    Supreme Court of Pennsylvania.
    Sept. 27, 2000.
   ORDER

PER CURIAM:

AND NOW, this 27th day of September, 2000, it is ordered that the charges docketed at No. 22 DB 1998 be dismissed.

Justice NIGRO files a dissenting statement.

NIGRO, Justice,

Dissenting.

I dissent because I find that there was clear and sufficient evidence to establish that Respondent committed numerous violations of Rule of Professional Conduct 1.1.  