In re Jaffe

Supreme Court of New Jersey

In re Jaffe

47 A.3d 668, 211 N.J. 1, 2012 WL 3000232, 2012 N.J. LEXIS 775

DecidedJuly 18, 2012

StatusPublished

This text of 47 A.3d 668 (In re Jaffe) 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 Jaffe, 47 A.3d 668, 211 N.J. 1, 2012 WL 3000232, 2012 N.J. LEXIS 775 (N.J. 2012).

Pincite

Opinion

ORDER

The Disciplinary Review Board having filed with the Court its decision in DRB 11-433, concluding that MARK H. JAFFE of PRINCETON, who was admitted to the bar of this State in 1988, should be reprimanded for violating RPC 3.3(a)(1) (knowingly making a false statement of material fact or law to a tribunal), RPC 3.3(a)(5) (failure to disclose to a tribunal a material fact knowing that the omission is reasonably certain to mislead the tribunal), and RPC 3.3(d)(in an ex parte proceeding, a lawyer shall inform the tribunal of all relevant facts known to the lawyer that should be disclosed to permit the tribunal to make an informed decision, whether or not the facts are adverse), and good cause appearing;

It is ORDERED that MARK H. JAFFE 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

ORDER

The Disciplinary Review Board having filed with the Court its decision in DRB 11-433, concluding that MARK H. JAFFE of PRINCETON, who was admitted to the bar of this State in 1988, should be reprimanded for violating RPC 3.3(a)(1) (knowingly making a false statement of material fact or law to a tribunal), RPC 3.3(a)(5) (failure to disclose to a tribunal a material fact knowing that the omission is reasonably certain to mislead the tribunal), and RPC 3.3(d)(in an ex parte proceeding, a lawyer shall inform the tribunal of all relevant facts known to the lawyer that should be disclosed to permit the tribunal to make an informed decision, whether or not the facts are adverse), and good cause appearing;

It is ORDERED that MARK H. JAFFE 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.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

47 A.3d 668, 211 N.J. 1, 2012 WL 3000232, 2012 N.J. LEXIS 775, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-jaffe-nj-2012.