On Wednesday, March 8, 2023, the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania denied the petition for the reinstatement of attorney Michael Andrew Rabel. The case is entitled “In the matter of Michael Andrew Rabel” with case no. 33 DB 2015.

On April 21, 2016, the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania suspended the petitioner on consent for five years. The joint petition in support of discipline on consent which was approved by the court addressed the petitioner’s misconduct in 11 separate legal matters which involved him in violation of the Rules of Professional Conduct of the jurisdictions of Florida, Virginia, Connecticut, and seven other states. The alleged misconduct of the petitioner involved the following: improper solicitation of clients, unauthorized practice of law, charging and/or collecting an illegal or clearly excessive fee, improper handling of advanced fees, failure to return files, and unearned fees upon termination of representation, lack of diligence, and lack of communication.

The filing states:

“Petitioner became involved with a loose affiliation of attorneys nationwide who were in the mortgage foreclosure mitigation business. The central lawyer from New York State had convinced Petitioner that because he had attorneys in the network admitted in various states, any of the other attorneys could perform work in that jurisdiction with the in-state attorney being ” local counsel.”

The filing continues:

“After investigation, the DFI found that Petitioner violated sections of the Revised Code of Washington, which constituted a basis for the entry of an Order to cease and desist from engaging in the business of a mortgage broker or loan originator and prohibited him from doing so for a period of five years.”

Following his suspension, the petitioner filed a petition for reinstatement. This was followed by a prehearing conference by the District IV of the Hearing Committee, wherein the petitioner testified on his own behalf and presented the testimony of five additional witnesses. Unfortunately, on April 8, 2022, the committee concluded that the petitioner failed to meet his burden of proof.

The filing further states:

“Petitioner failed to meet his burden by clear and convincing evidence that he has the moral qualifications, competency, and learning in the law required for admission to practice law in the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania.”

According to the court, during the review of the committee, they concluded that the petitioner failed to meet his burden, by clear and convincing evidence, that he has the moral qualifications, competency, and learning in the law required for admission to practice law in the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania. The hearing committee added that the petitioner is lacking in thoroughness and candidness with regard to his questionnaire, amended answers, and testimony which later on raised questions concerning his competence to practice law.

The petitioner also failed to satisfy his debts, or to set forth any good faith effort to do so, wherein according to the committee, demonstrates that the petitioner has not fully engaged in the rehabilitation that would support his reinstatement. For these reasons, the court agreed with the committee and decided to deny the reinstatement of Mr. Rabel.

The Disposition states:

“And now, this 8th day of March 2023, the Petition for Reinstatement is denied. Petitioner is ordered to pay the expenses incurred by the Board in the investigation and processing of the Petition for Reinstatement.”

Mr. Rabel practices in Allison Park, Allegheny County, Pennsylvania. He is licensed in Pennsylvania. Mr. Rabel’s info can be found on lawyer.com.

A copy of the original filing can be found here.