A Level Of Transparency

The web page of the Pennsylvania Disciplinary Board has a recent post that gives the public easy access to information about its work:

The Disciplinary Board has published a table of discipline numbers for 2012.  In all, discipline was ordered  in 272 cases, down about 10 percent from last year’s 300, but right at the average for the last seven years.  Public reprimand, a new form of discipline last year, was ordered  in nine cases.  Other forms of public discipline, including probation, censure, suspension, and disbarment, were within the ranges of recent years. Private discipline, including informal admonition and private reprimand, were down by about a quarter.  Reinstatements were back to typical level, after a two-year surge following the adoption of new rules on administrative  suspension.

Statistical junkies can see the numbers here.

Here is a very detailed annual report for 2011 on operation of the Illinois ARDC. As in Pennsylvania, this report is easily found on the ARDC web page.

The Michigan system also makes information about its disciplinary operation readily available.

Massachusetts weighs in here.

If you visit this blog, you have heard this before. In the District of Columbia, I am unaware of any effort to let the public have access, much less ready access, to this type of information. (Mike Frisch)