Thursday, January 10, 2019
A three-month suspension with reinstatement if certain directives are adhered to has been ordered by the New Jersey Supreme Court.
The Disciplinary Review Board majority describes the misconduct
This case involves respondent’s failure to cooperate with the OAE for more than one-and-one-half years. Following two overdrafts in her trust account, she failed to produce records she was required to maintain under R. 1:21-6, despite the OAE’S numerous requests, the granting of extensions, and scheduled audits. As mentioned above, respondent’s failure to cooperate eventually led to her temporary suspension. In the interim, she also failed to reply to an additional grievance.
And on sanction, a three-month suspension
We further determine that Respondent should not be permitted to apply for reinstatement until she has fully cooperated with the OAE; and upon reinstatement, that she practice under the supervision of an OAE-approved proctor for a two-year period; that she submit monthly reconciliations of her trust account to the OAE on a quarterly basis for that same period; and that she attend an OAE-approved trust and business accounting course, in addition to the mandatory continuing legal education credits that R. 1:42-I requires.
Dissent of member Gallipoli
I dissent from the majority and vote to recommend respondent’s disbarment. I do so not because of respondent’s disciplinary record, but because an attorney who fails to comply with an Order of the Court entered in an attorney discipline matter manifests a disdain for the disciplinary process and the responsibilities attendant to the privilege of being permitted to practice the profession of the law. If the Board were to recommend disbarment, respondent would be compelled to appear before the Court to explain why she has not complied with the Court’s Order requiring the filing of the R. 1:20-20 affidavit. I believe that this should occur.