Mintz, Matter of
| Decision Date | 21 January 1992 |
| Citation | 126 N.J. 484,600 A.2d 143 |
| Parties | In the Matter of Mark A. MINTZ, an Attorney at Law. |
| Court | New Jersey Supreme Court |
The Disciplinary Review Board having filed a report with the Court, recommending that MARK A. MINTZ of HOBOKEN, who was admitted to the bar of this State in 1980, be suspended for two years for violations of RPC 1.3 (), RPC 1.1(a) (gross neglect), RPC 1.4 (failure to communicate), RPC 1.1(b) (pattern of neglect), RPC 8.1(b) (), and Rule 1:21-1(a) ();
And good cause appearing;
It is ORDERED that the report and recommendation of the Disciplinary Review Board are adopted and MARK A. MINTZ is hereby suspended from the practice of law for a period of two years, effective February 2, 1992, and until the further Order of the Court; and it is further
ORDERED that respondent's restoration to the practice of law shall be conditioned on his serving under a proctor for two years; and it is further
ORDERED that all funds, if any, currently existing in any New Jersey financial institution maintained by respondent, pursuant to Rule 1:21-6, shall be restrained from disbursement except on application to this Court, for good cause shown, pending the further Order of this Court; and it is further
ORDERED that respondent be restrained and enjoined from practicing law during the period of his suspension and that he comply with Administrative Guideline No. 23 of the Office of Attorney Ethics dealing with suspended attorneys; and it is further
ORDERED that respondent shall reimburse the Ethics Financial Committee for appropriate administrative costs incurred in the prosecution of this matter.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
In re Mintz
...Rules of Professional Conduct 1.1(a), 1.1(b), 1.3, 1.4, 8.1(b), and New Jersey Rules of General Application 1:21-1(a).1In re Mintz, 126 N.J. 484, 600 A.2d 143 (1992). The New Jersey Supreme Court further ordered, as a condition of reinstatement, that respondent practice under the supervisio......
-
In re Perdue
...involving dishonesty, fraud, deceit or misrepresentation, and engaged in conduct prejudicial to the administration of justice); In re Mintz, 126 N.J. 484 (1992) (two-year suspension for attorney who abandoned four clients and was found guilty of a pattern of neglect, failure to maintain a b......
-
In re McCartney
...matter; the attorney's ethics history included a private reprimand, a temporary suspension, and two six-month suspensions); and In re Mintz, 126 N.J. 484 (1992) (two-yearsuspension for attorney who abandoned four clients and was found guilty of a pattern of neglect, failure to maintain a bo......
-
In re Milara
...his documents and without counsel; the attorney's disciplinary history included a reprimand and a three-month suspension); and In re Mintz, 126 N.J. 484 (1992) (two-year suspension for attorney who abandoned four clients and was found guilty of a pattern of neglect, failure to maintain a bo......