In Re Kleinfeld

Supreme Court of New Jersey

In Re Kleinfeld

276 A.2d 376, 58 N.J. 217, 1971 N.J. LEXIS 240

DecidedApril 22, 1971

StatusPublished

This text of 276 A.2d 376 (In Re Kleinfeld) 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 Kleinfeld, 276 A.2d 376, 58 N.J. 217, 1971 N.J. LEXIS 240 (N.J. 1971).

Pincite

Opinion

Per Curiam:

Respondent was charged in a federal information with wilfully and knowingly attempting to evade and defeat a large part of income taxes due for the years 1961 through 1963. Respondent pleaded nolo contendere to one count of the information; a fine of $1,000 was imposed. Thereupon, the remaining counts of the information were dismissed. Respondent’s plea of nolo contendere is tantamount for present purposes to a plea of guilty and his conviction subjects him to disciplinary action. After a hearing, *218 the Hudson County Ethics Committee filed a presentment and we thereafter issued an order to show cause.

We have weighed all the mitigating considerations advanced by respondent. Under the circumstances, the appropriate discipline is the suspension from the practice of law for six months and until further order of this Court.

It is so ordered.

For suspension for six months — Chief Justice Wbinteaub and Justices Jacobs, Ebancis, Peoctoe, Hall, Schettino and Mountain — 7.

Opposed — None.

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

Per Curiam:

Respondent was charged in a federal information with wilfully and knowingly attempting to evade and defeat a large part of income taxes due for the years 1961 through 1963. Respondent pleaded nolo contendere to one count of the information; a fine of $1,000 was imposed. Thereupon, the remaining counts of the information were dismissed. Respondent’s plea of nolo contendere is tantamount for present purposes to a plea of guilty and his conviction subjects him to disciplinary action. After a hearing, *218 the Hudson County Ethics Committee filed a presentment and we thereafter issued an order to show cause.

We have weighed all the mitigating considerations advanced by respondent. Under the circumstances, the appropriate discipline is the suspension from the practice of law for six months and until further order of this Court.

It is so ordered.

For suspension for six months — Chief Justice Wbinteaub and Justices Jacobs, Ebancis, Peoctoe, Hall, Schettino and Mountain — 7.

Opposed — None.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

276 A.2d 376, 58 N.J. 217, 1971 N.J. LEXIS 240, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-kleinfeld-nj-1971.