In re Seymour
Citation | 230 N.J. 339,166 A.3d 1172 (Mem) |
Parties | In the MATTER OF Anthony D. SEYMOUR, an Attorney at Law (Attorney No. 027211980) |
Decision Date | 11 August 2017 |
Court | New Jersey Supreme Court |
230 N.J. 339
166 A.3d 1172 (Mem)
In the MATTER OF Anthony D. SEYMOUR, an Attorney at Law (Attorney No. 027211980)
Supreme Court of New Jersey.
August 11, 2017
ORDER
This matter have been duly presented pursuant to Rule 1:20–10(b), following a granting of a motion for discipline by consent (DRB 17–138) of ANTHONY D. SEYMOUR of ROCHELLE PARK, who was admitted to the bar of this State in 1980;
And the Office of Attorney Ethics and respondent having signed a stipulation of discipline by consent in which it was agreed that respondent violated RPC 1.5(a) (unreasonable fee), RPC 1.5(b) (failure to communicate in writing the basis or rate of the fee), RPC 1.7(a) (concurrent conflict of interest), RPC 1.7(b) (rule governing the procedures with which an attorney must comply to avoid violation of conflict of interest), RPC 1.15(a) (failure to safeguard funds), RPC 8.4(c) (conduct involving dishonesty, fraud, deceit or misrepresentation);
And the parties having agreed that respondent's conduct violated RPC 1.5(a), RPC 1.5(b), RPC 1.7(a), RPC 1.7(b), RPC 1.15(a), and RPC 8.4(c), and that said conduct warrants a censure to a three-month suspension or such lesser disciplinary sanction as the Board deems appropriate;
And the Board having determined to dismiss the stipulated violations of RPC 1.7(b), RPC 1.15(a) and RPC 8.4(c) ;
And the Disciplinary Review Board having determined that a censure is the appropriate discipline for respondent's unethical conduct and having granted the
motion for discipline by consent in District Docket No. XIV–2012–0657E;
And the Disciplinary Review Board having submitted the record of the proceedings to the Clerk of the Supreme Court for the entry of an order of discipline in accordance with Rule 1:20–16(e);
And good cause appearing;
It is ORDERED that ANTHONY D. SEYMOUR of ROCHELLE PARK is hereby censured; and it is further
ORDERED that...
To continue reading
Request your trial