In Re Kaminsky

37 A.3d 1135, 209 N.J. 418, 2012 N.J. LEXIS 208
CourtSupreme Court of New Jersey
DecidedMarch 9, 2012
DocketD-67 September Term 2011, 069793
StatusPublished

This text of 37 A.3d 1135 (In Re Kaminsky) 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 Kaminsky, 37 A.3d 1135, 209 N.J. 418, 2012 N.J. LEXIS 208 (N.J. 2012).

Opinion

ORDER

The Disciplinary Review Board having filed with the Court its decision in DRB 11-267, concluding that JERROLD N. KAMINSKY of KENDALL PARK, who was admitted to the bar of this State in 1977, should be suspended from the practice of law for a period of three months for his unethical conduct in six matters, including violation of RPC 1.2 (assisting a client in conduct the *419 attorney knows is illegal, criminal or fraudulent), RPC 1.7(a) (conflict of interest), and RPC 8.4(c) (conduct involving dishonesty, fraud, deceit or misrepresentation), and good cause appearing;

It is ORDERED that JERROLD N. KAMINSKY is suspended from the practice of law for a period of three months and until the further Order of the Court, effective April 9, 2012; and it is further

ORDERED that respondent comply with Rule 1:20-20 dealing with suspended attorneys; and it is further

ORDERED that pursuant to Rule l:20-20(e), respondent’s failure to comply with the Affidavit of Compliance requirement of Rule l:20-20(b)(15) may (1) preclude the Disciplinary Review Board from considering respondent’s petition for reinstatement for a period of up to six months from the date respondent files proof of compliance; (2) be found to constitute a violation of RPC 8.1(b) and RPC 8.4(c); and (3) provide a basis for an action for contempt pursuant to Rule 1:10-2; 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

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
37 A.3d 1135, 209 N.J. 418, 2012 N.J. LEXIS 208, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-kaminsky-nj-2012.