In re Forsman

Supreme Court of New Jersey

In re Forsman

158 A.3d 20, 228 N.J. 463, 2017 WL 1282787, 2017 N.J. LEXIS 385

DecidedApril 6, 2017

StatusPublished

This text of 158 A.3d 20 (In re Forsman) 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 Forsman, 158 A.3d 20, 228 N.J. 463, 2017 WL 1282787, 2017 N.J. LEXIS 385 (N.J. 2017).

Pincite

Opinion

[464]*464ORDER

The Disciplinary Review Board having filed with the Court its decision in DRB 16-033, concluding that PAUL J. FORSMAN, formerly of ATLANTIC HIGHLANDS, who was admitted to the bar of this State in 197 9, and who was transferred to disability inactive status on August 4, 2016, be reprimanded for violating RPC 5.5(a)(praeticing law while ineligible to do so), and RPC 8.4(a)(knowingly violating the RPCs);

And the Court having determined from its review of the matter that respondent’s violations are de minimus and undeserving of formal discipline, and that the formal complaint in District Docket No. VI-2012-0041E, should be dismissed;

And good cause appearing;

It is ORDERED that the formal complaint against PAUL J. FORSMAN in District Docket No. VI-2012-0041E, is hereby dismissed.

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

[464]*464ORDER

The Disciplinary Review Board having filed with the Court its decision in DRB 16-033, concluding that PAUL J. FORSMAN, formerly of ATLANTIC HIGHLANDS, who was admitted to the bar of this State in 197 9, and who was transferred to disability inactive status on August 4, 2016, be reprimanded for violating RPC 5.5(a)(praeticing law while ineligible to do so), and RPC 8.4(a)(knowingly violating the RPCs);

And the Court having determined from its review of the matter that respondent’s violations are de minimus and undeserving of formal discipline, and that the formal complaint in District Docket No. VI-2012-0041E, should be dismissed;

And good cause appearing;

It is ORDERED that the formal complaint against PAUL J. FORSMAN in District Docket No. VI-2012-0041E, is hereby dismissed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

158 A.3d 20, 228 N.J. 463, 2017 WL 1282787, 2017 N.J. LEXIS 385, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-forsman-nj-2017.