In re Chulak

705 A.2d 1207, 152 N.J. 443, 1998 N.J. LEXIS 125
CourtSupreme Court of New Jersey
DecidedFebruary 25, 1998
StatusPublished
Cited by2 cases

This text of 705 A.2d 1207 (In re Chulak) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of New Jersey primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
In re Chulak, 705 A.2d 1207, 152 N.J. 443, 1998 N.J. LEXIS 125 (N.J. 1998).

Opinion

ORDER

The Disciplinary Review Board on December 16, 1997, having filed with the Court its decision concluding that MICHAEL J. CHULAK of UNION CITY, who was admitted to the bar of this State in 1986, should be suspended from the practice of law for a period of three months for violating RPC 3.3(a) (lack of candor towards a tribunal), RPC 5.5(b) (assisting a non-attorney in the unauthorized practice of law), and RPC 8.4(c) (misrepresentations);

And the Disciplinary Review Board having further concluded that prior to reinstatement to practice, respondent should complete the Skills and Methods Course offered by the Institute for Continuing Legal Education and that the Office of Attorney [444]*444Ethics should audit respondent’s attorney books and records, and good cause appearing;

It is ORDERED that MICHAEL J. CHULAK is hereby suspended from the practice of law for a period of three months, effective March 24, 1998, and until further Order of the Court; and it is further

ORDERED that prior to reinstatement to the practice of law respondent shall satisfactorily complete a course in professional ethics offered by the Institute for Continuing Legal Education; and it is further

ORDERED that the Office of Attorney Ethics shall conduct an audit of respondent’s attorney books and records; 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 be restrained and enjoined from practicing law during the period of his suspension and that he comply with Rule 1:20-20; and it is further

ORDERED that respondent reimburse the Disciplinary Oversight Committee for .appropriate administrative costs incurred in the prosecution of this matter.

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

Related

In Re Pena
753 A.2d 633 (Supreme Court of New Jersey, 2000)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
705 A.2d 1207, 152 N.J. 443, 1998 N.J. LEXIS 125, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-chulak-nj-1998.