In re Hartwyk

171 A.3d 205, 231 N.J. 21
Supreme Court of New Jersey·Decided October 20, 2017·No. 079187·Published

Opinion

ORDER

The Disciplinary Review Board having filed with the Court its decision in DRB 16-266, concluding that as a matter of final discipline pursuant to Rule 1:20—13(c), CHRISTOPHER MICHAEL HARTWYK of SOUTH ORANGE, who was admitted to the bar of this State in 1985, should be reprimanded for violating RPC 8.4(b)(commission of a criminal act reflecting adversely on the lawyer’s honesty, trustworthiness, or fitness as a lawyer) and RPC 8.4(c)(conduct involving dishonesty, fraud, deceit or misrepresentation), and good cause appearing;

It is ORDERED that CHRISTOPHER MICHAEL HARTWYK 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

[22] 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 Hartwyk, 171 A.3d 205, 231 N.J. 21 (N.J. 2017).

171 A.3d 205 (In re Hartwyk) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.