Scull, In re
| Decision Date | 21 May 1973 |
| Citation | 63 N.J. 108,305 A.2d 70 |
| Parties | In the Matter of Norman E. SCULL, an Attorney at Law. |
| Court | New Jersey Supreme Court |
Frederick C. Vonhof, Newark, for Essex County Ethics Committee.
Matthew P. Boylan, Newark, for respondent.
This is a disciplinary proceeding. On May 15, 1972 an ethics complaint against respondent, Norman E. Scull, was filed with the Essex County Ethics Committee. Respondent, although served with the complaint, failed to answer the charge within time. Accordingly this Court issued its Order to Show Cause returnable June 30, 1972. Respondent filed a wholly inadequate answer on June 29th and when he appeared before this Court on June 30th he was granted leave to file a responsive answer. A hearing on the charge was held before the Committee on September 7, 1972.
On October 18, 1972 the Committee filed its presentment charging respondent with the improper use of funds deposited in his trust account. The funds in question represented the proceeds of a settlement of an automobile accident case. The Committee found that respondent deposited the money in his trust account, but failed to establish a separate controlled bank account containing the infant-plaintiff's share of the funds, as was required by the order of the court approving the settlement. Several months later after repeated demands by the infant-plaintiff's father, and following several requests from the Essex County Surrogate's Office, respondent forwarded to the Surrogate the funds belonging to the infant. The check and covering letter are dated May 11, 1972.
At the September 7, 1972 hearing before the Committee respondent admitted the diversion of these funds for his personal use, conceding that there had been a shortage of funds in his trust account following his receipt of the money. Examination of records produced by respondent as to his trust account prompted the Committee to make a further investigation into and examination of respondent's handling of other trust moneys.
A further hearing was held before the Committee on January 26, 1973 at which time numerous other diversions of trust funds to respondent's personal use were disclosed. These diversions occurred during the period September 1971 through August 1972. However, the Committee had great difficulty in reconciling or balancing the account since respondent did not maintain a ledger book of his trust account and resort had to be made to bank statements, cancelled checks and deposit slips. To determine how much and to whom money was actually owing, all of respondent's office files would have had to be reviewed.
Respondent has admitted these additional diversions of trust funds, as well as his failure to maintain proper records of his trust account in violation of R. 1:21--6(b)(2). His sole explanation is that he had experienced an emotional paralysis brought on by personal and family difficulties, which paralysis persists to this day. He said that since July 16, 1971 he has been undergoing psychotherapy and he has submitted a report from the Rev. Charles C. Perroncel (Pastoral Counselor) indicating a favorable prognosis.
Respondent states that none of his clients...
To continue reading
Request your trial
- Hornyak v. Great Atlantic & Pac. Tea Co.
- Wyatt v. Metropolitan Maintenance Co.
- Barone v. Harra
-
Proposed Rules Relating to Grievance Procedures, In re, 7111
...Bar Association, 269 Md. 313, 305 A.2d 845 (1973), cert. denied, 414 U.S. 1065, 94 S.Ct. 572, 38 L.Ed.2d 470 (1973); see In re Scull, 63 N.J. 108, 305 A.2d 70 (1973). 6. Rule 14, subd. E, first sentence, "may" instead of 7. It was suggested subsequent to the oral arguments that we add to ru......