In re James

Supreme Court of New Jersey

In re James

638 A.2d 128, 135 N.J. 71, 1994 N.J. LEXIS 153

DecidedJanuary 27, 1994

StatusPublished

This text of 638 A.2d 128 (In re James) 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 James, 638 A.2d 128, 135 N.J. 71, 1994 N.J. LEXIS 153 (N.J. 1994).

Pincite

Opinion

ORDER

V. JOSEPH JAMES, of ST. MARY’S, PHILADELPHIA who was admitted to the bar of this State in 1985, having been ordered to show cause on January 19, 1994, why this Court’s Order of temporary suspension should not be continued pending the disposition of ethics proceedings against him, and respondent having failed to appear on the return date of the Order to Show Cause;

It is ORDERED that the suspension of V. JOSEPH JAMES shall continue pending further Order of this Court; and it is further

ORDERED that respondent shall continue to be restrained and enjoined from practicing law during the period of his suspension and that he shall continue to comply with Regulation 23 of the Administrative Guidelines Governing Suspended Attorneys; and it is further

ORDERED that the Office of Attorney Ethics shall take such protective action pursuant to Rule 1:20-11(c) as it deems appropriate, including the transfer to the Clerk of the Superior Court for deposit in the Superior Court Trust Fund the attorney account funds held in any financial institution by V. JOSEPH JAMES, which funds were restrained from disbursement by this Court’s Order of December 21, 1993.

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

ORDER

V. JOSEPH JAMES, of ST. MARY’S, PHILADELPHIA who was admitted to the bar of this State in 1985, having been ordered to show cause on January 19, 1994, why this Court’s Order of temporary suspension should not be continued pending the disposition of ethics proceedings against him, and respondent having failed to appear on the return date of the Order to Show Cause;

It is ORDERED that the suspension of V. JOSEPH JAMES shall continue pending further Order of this Court; and it is further

ORDERED that respondent shall continue to be restrained and enjoined from practicing law during the period of his suspension and that he shall continue to comply with Regulation 23 of the Administrative Guidelines Governing Suspended Attorneys; and it is further

ORDERED that the Office of Attorney Ethics shall take such protective action pursuant to Rule 1:20-11(c) as it deems appropriate, including the transfer to the Clerk of the Superior Court for deposit in the Superior Court Trust Fund the attorney account funds held in any financial institution by V. JOSEPH JAMES, which funds were restrained from disbursement by this Court’s Order of December 21, 1993.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

638 A.2d 128, 135 N.J. 71, 1994 N.J. LEXIS 153, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-james-nj-1994.