In re Burstein

66 A.3d 1293, 214 N.J. 46, 2013 WL 3013578, 2013 N.J. LEXIS 593
Supreme Court of New Jersey·Decided June 13, 2013·Published

Opinion

ORDER

The Disciplinary Review Board having filed with the Court its decision in DRB 12-368, concluding that NOAH M. BURSTEIN of TEANECK, who was admitted to the bar of this State in 1975, should be reprimanded for violating RPC 1.1(a) (gross neglect), [47] RPC 1.3 (lack of diligence), and RPC 1.4(b) (failure to keep client reasonably informed about the status of matter and failure to comply with a client’s reasonable requests for information), and good cause appearing;

It is ORDERED that NOAH M. BURSTEIN is hereby reprimanded; and it is further

ORDERED that the entire record of this matter be made a permanent part of respondent’s file as an attorney at law of this State; and it is further

ORDERED that respondent reimburse the Disciplinary Oversight Committee for appropriate administrative costs and actual expenses incurred in the prosecution of this matter, as provided in Rule 1:20-17.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

In re Burstein, 66 A.3d 1293, 214 N.J. 46, 2013 WL 3013578, 2013 N.J. LEXIS 593 (N.J. 2013).

66 A.3d 1293 (In re Burstein) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.