Case Name: In the Matter of Harry J. OXMAN and Ralph S. Levitan, Appellants
Court: Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Jurisdiction: Pennsylvania
Decision Date: 1975-10-03
Citations: 463 Pa. 225
Docket Number: No. 225
Parties: In the Matter of Harry J. OXMAN and Ralph S. Levitan, Appellants.
Judges: Before JONES, C. J., and EAGEN, O’BRIEN, ROBERTS, POMEROY, NIX and MANDERINO, JJ.
Reporter: Pennsylvania State Reports
Volume: 463
Pages: 225–229

Head Matter:
344 A.2d 804
In the Matter of Harry J. OXMAN and Ralph S. Levitan, Appellants.
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania.
Argued June 24, 1975.
Decided Oct. 3, 1975.
Thomas B. Rutter, Philadelphia, for appellants.
William P. Stewart, Philadelphia, for appellee, Special Judicial Investigation.
Before JONES, C. J., and EAGEN, O’BRIEN, ROBERTS, POMEROY, NIX and MANDERINO, JJ.

Opinion:
OPINION OF THE COURT
PER CURIAM:
In the case of In re Silverberg, 459 Pa. 107, 327 A.2d 106 (1974), we held that:
" . . . appellants are entitled to a new disciplinary hearing at which no use of their prior claim of the privilege against self-incrimination should be permitted." At page 113.
On remand the special disciplinary court did not conduct a new hearing but merely reconsidered the record of the prior hearing, purporting to disregard the tainted evidence that had been introduced therein. We hold that this procedure failed to comply with our mandate in Silverberg.
The order of the special disciplinary court is vacated and the matter is remanded to that court for a new disciplinary hearing in compliance with our prior order.
POMEROY filed a dissenting opinion in which JONES, C. J., and NIX, J., join.