1. (a) General rule. The Office of Disciplinary Counsel or the Board shall not entertain any complaint arising out of acts or omissions occurring more than four years prior to the date of the complaint, except as provided in subsection (b).

2. (b) Exceptions.

   1. (1) The four year limitation in subsection (a) shall not apply in cases involving theft or misappropriation, conviction of a crime or a knowing act of concealment.
   2. (2) When litigation has resulted in a finding that the subject acts or omissions involved civil fraud, ineffective assistance of counsel or prosecutorial misconduct by the respondent-attorney, a complaint may be entertained if filed or opened within: (i) four years of the subject acts or omissions; or (ii) two years after the litigation in which the finding was made becomes final, whichever date is later.

3. (c) Litigation ‘‘becomes final’’ within the meaning of subsection (b)(2)(ii) at the conclusion of direct or collateral review, including discretionary review in the Supreme Court of the United States and the highest state court, or at the expiration of time for seeking the review.

   Official Note

   Litigation resulting in a finding of civil fraud, ineffective assistance of counsel or prosecutorial misconduct is not a prerequisite to Office of Disciplinary Counsel’s or the Board’s entertaining a complaint involving one of those three forms of misconduct, and subsection (b)(2) should not be read to impose such a requirement.

Source

The provisions of this § 85.10 amended January 15, 1988, effective January 16, 1988, 18 Pa.B. 241; amended May 27, 1994, effective May 28, 1994, 24 Pa.B. 2693; amended April 12, 2002, effective April 13, 2002, 32 Pa.B. 1838; amended February 12, 2021, effective 30 days after publication, 51 Pa.B. 781. Immediately preceding text appears at serial page (397796).