No. 1863, Disciplinary Docket No. 3
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA OFFICE OF DISCIPLINARY COUNSEL, Petitioner v. JASON ANTHONY JENKINS, Respondent No. 1863 Disciplinary Docket No.3 No. 122 DB 2012 Attorney Registration No. 79647 (Lehigh County) ORDER PER CURIAM: AND NOW, this 21st day of February, 2013, there having been filed with this Court by Jason Anthony Jenkins his verified Statement of Resignation dated December 28, 2012, stating that he desires to resign from the Bar of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania in accordance with the provisions of Rule 215, Pa.R.D.E., it is ORDERED that the resignation of Jason Anthony Jenkins is accepted; he is disbarred on consent from the Bar of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania retroactive to September 28, 2012; and he shall comply with the provisions of Rule 217, Pa.R.D.E. Respondent shall pay costs, if any, to the Disciplinary Board pursuant to Rule 208(g), Pa.R.D.E. A True Copy Patricia Nicola As Of 2/21/L013 ~J1tidd Att.est: Ch1ef Cler Supreme Court of Pennsylvania BEFORE THE DISCIPLINARY BOARD OF THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA OFFICE OF DISCIPLINARY COUNSEL Petitioner No. 1863 Disciplinary Docket No. 3 No. 122 DB 2012 v. Attorney Registration No. 79647 JASON ANTHONY JENKINS Respondent (Lehigh County) RESIGNATION BY RESPONDENT Pursuant to Rule 215 of the Pennsylvania Rules of Disciplinary Enforcement BEFORE THE DISCIPLINARY BOARD OF THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA In the matter of No. 1863 Disciplinary Docket No. 3 JASON ANTHONY JENKINS No. 122 DB 2012 Attorney Reg. No. 79647 (Lehigh County) RESIGNATION UNDER RULE 215, Pa.R.D.E. JASON ANTHONY JENKINS hereby tenders his . resignation from the practice of law in the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania in conformity with Rule 215, Pa.R.D.E. and further states as follows: 1. having He been is an attorney admitted to on the temporary bar of suspension the status, Commonwealth of Pennsylvania on or about May 28, 1997. 2. By Order dated September 28, 2012, the Supreme Court granted the Joint Petition to Temporarily Suspend an Attorney and placed Respondent on temporary suspension pursuant to Rule 208(f), Pa.R.D.E. 3. said bar. He desires to submit his resignation as a member of 4. His resignation is freely and voluntarily rendered; he ·is not being subjected to coercion or duress and he is fully aware of the implications of submitting this resignation. 5. He is investigation misconduct, aware into that there allegations that is pending presently he has an guilty of been the nature of which allegations are set forth in a Stipulation of Facts attached hereto, made a part hereof, and marked Exhibit "A." 6. He acknowledges that the material facts upon which the allegations of misconduct set forth in the attached Exhibit "A" are based are true. 7. He submits the within resignation because he knows that he could not successfully defend himself against the charges of professional misconduct set forth in the attached Exhibit "A" or other charges which might be brought based upon allegations of misconduct. 8. He resignation acknowledges he is that knowingly, by submitting voluntarily and the within intelligently waiving the right to have a disciplinary hearing pursuant to Rule 214 (f) (1), Pa.R.D.E. 9. He is fully aware that the within resignation statement is irrevocable and that he can only apply for reinstatement to the practice of law pursuant to ·the provisions of Rule 218, Pa.R.D.E. 10. He acknowledges that he is fully aware of his right to -2- consult and proceeding. employ counsel to represent He ~ has not retained, upon the advice of counsel him in the instant consulted with and acted in connection with his decision to execute the within resignation. 11. on He requests that the effective date of his disbarment consent be September temporary suspension. 28, 2012, the date he was He has been informed that placed on the Office of Disciplinary Counsel does not object to Respondent's request. He understands that the Supreme Court has the discretion to grant or deny his request regarding retroactivity. It is understood that the statements made herein are subject to the penalties of 18 Pa.C.S.A. §4904 (relating falsification to authorities). Signed this.)f-4\. day of Otte.,.~e.,.. ' 2012. JENKINS Re -3- to unsworn BEFORE THE DISCIPLINARY BOARD OF THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA In the matter of No. 1863 Disciplinary Docket No. 3 JASON ANTHONY JENKINS No. 122 DB 2012 Attorney Reg. No. 79647 (Lehigh County) STIPULATION OF FACTS 1. ODC alleged by DB-7-Request for Respondent's Statement of Position, dated May 10, 2012, that Respondent had converted, misapplied or misappropriated a $40,000 check that he had received in June 2011 on behalf of his clients, Charles and Gladys Krieble. 2. Respondent submitted a Letter of Reply in July 2012 in which Respondent admitted to converting, misapplying or misappropriating the Kriebles' funds. 3. Respondent also self-reported that he had converted, misapplied or misappropriated client funds on four other occasions and represented that he was in the process of making restitution to his clients. 4. Respondent admits that he converted, misapplied or misappropriated $56,250.00 belonging to his client, Cameron Pakrough, that he had received on September 29, 2009, September 14, 2010, and December 22, 2010 and that he made full restitution of those funds to Mr. Pakrough on July 19, 2012. 5. Respondent admits that he converted, misapplied or misappropriated $8,295.02 belonging to his client, Chris Strobaugh, that he had received in June 2010 and that he made full restitution of those funds to Mr. Strobaugh on July 13, 2012. 6. Respondent admits that he converted, misapplied or misappropriated $6,375.50 belonging to his client, Michael Nice, that he had received in May 2010 and that he made full restitution of those funds to Mr. Nice on July 13, 2012. 7. Respondent admits that he converted, misapplied or misappropriated $26,144.50 belonging to his clients, Charles and Gladys Krieble that he had received in June 2011 and that he made full restitution of those funds to the Kriebles on July 17, 2012. 8. Respondent admits that he converted, misapplied or misappropriated ·$14,636.89 belonging to his clients, Ron and Shirley Landis that he had received in June 2009 and that he made full restitution of those funds to the Landises on June 12, 2012. ·:Exhibit "A"
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
