Attorneys for state Supreme Court Justice J. Michael Eakin asked Tuesday for a public hearing to present a deal that could resolve the case related to his involvement in an exchange of offensive emails.

Last month, a three-judge panel from the Court of Judicial Discipline effectively derailed a resolution that had been reached between Eakin and the Judicial Conduct Board (JCB), which serves a prosecutorial role in the case.

In the court filing Tuesday, Eakin's attorneys asked to present the proposal to the court en banc. If that request is granted, a majority of judges from the six-member bench would be needed to resolve the case.

"It's up to the majority to determine whether they will approve the agreement or not," said Bill Costopoulos, Eakin's attorney. "Everybody understands the court doesn't have to accept. The motion is in the hopes of having the court at least hear it and then decide."

Representatives from both the court, which may discipline judges and justices, and the JCB did not immediately respond to requests for comment Tuesday.

Emails exchanged via Eakin's private email account were brought to the JCB by Attorney General Kathleen Kane following a prior review in 2014. In its second review, the JCB alleged that Eakin violated the Constitution as well as rules against judges becoming involved in activities that create the appearance of impropriety or raise questions about their impartiality.

In December, the court suspended Eakin with pay from the Supreme Court pending the case's resolution.

Last month, Court of Judicial Discipline Judge Jack Panella refused to hear the details of the resolution, which was mediated by attorney and former JCB member Richard A. Sprague.

"We are in Pittsburgh today because it is the judiciary's responsibility to maintain transparency and be open and fair to both sides," Panella said, in court. "Anything involving this case and this court [has] to be held in open court and on the record."

When asked about whether such a motion to bring the matter to the full bench could alienate Panella and the panel of judges considering the case, Costopoulos said he hopes the motion is not taken personally.

"It's not meant to be personal," he said. "I believe that the mediation was entered into in good faith and that we've come up with a proposal the court should consider."

The court filing is included in its entirety below.