On Saturday, April 15, 2023, the Disciplinary Board of the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania publicly reprimanded attorney John R. Parroccini for his attempt to engage in physical sexual contact with a client and by making inappropriate remarks on the same.
The case is entitled “In the Matter of John R. Parroccini,” and was brought by the Office of the Disciplinary Counsel with case no. 136 DB 2022.
The charges cited Pennsylvania Rules of Professional Conduct 1.7(a)(2) and 1.16(a)(1) which states:
Except as provided in paragraph (b), a lawyer shall not represent a client if the representation involves a concurrent conflict of interest. A concurrent conflict of interest exists if: (2) there is a significant risk that the representation of one or more clients will be materially limited by the lawyer’s responsibilities to another client, a former client, or a third person, or by a personal interest of the lawyer.
Except as stated in paragraph (c), a lawyer shall not represent a client or, where representation has commenced, shall withdraw from the representation of a client if: (1) the representation will result in violation of the Rules of Professional Conduct or other law.
The Rules of Professional Conduct can be found here.
On March 20, 2023, through a joint petition in support of discipline on consent, it was alleged that the respondent made inappropriate remarks and attempted to engage in physical sexual contact with a client.
The filing states:
“(a) June 15, 2020: Respondent stated to LV that he had given money to “Andy” (a mutual acquaintance) and she would be depositing it in LV’s jail account later that day; (b) June 15, 2020: LV replied to Respondent’s email messages with “mwah” and “okay daddy”. (c) June 15, 2020: Respondent replied to LV “l liked the daddy part!!!” and “l know baby.”
The filing continues:
“(g) June 21, 2020: Respondent replied “Thanks, baby!! Love you”; (h) June 21, 2020: LV replied “Love [you] too”. (i) June 22, 2020: Respondent told LV “Hey, I’m here. I will be over this afternoon, so dress up!! What was the name of the girl you wanted me to check on??”.”
The filing further states:
“On July 9, 2020, jail authorities searched LV’s cell and found a handwritten letter addressed, “Dear My Future Husband.” The letter described in explicit detail the sexual acts LV would perform for the recipient and ended with “I love you so much, Baby! xoxo”. LV refused to be interviewed by ODC, and there is no statement from her as to who actually authored the letter or for whom the letter was intended.”
According to the court, a public sanction is necessary to impress on the respondent and the Bar the seriousness of this kind of misconduct and deter similar misconduct by him and other attorneys. In lieu of this, the ODC and the respondent jointly recommended that the appropriate discipline for the latter’s actions is a public reprimand.
The Disposition states:
“ORDERED that JOHN R. PARROCCINI be subjected to a PUBLIC REPRIMAND by the Disciplinary Board of the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania as provided in Rule 204(a) and Rule 205(c)(9) of the Pennsylvania Rules of Disciplinary Enforcement.”
Mr. Parroccini practices in Harrisburg, Pennsylvania. He is licensed in Pennsylvania. His info can be found on avvo.com.
A copy of the original filing can be found here.
