In re Larosa

Supreme Court of New Jersey

In re Larosa

884 A.2d 1253, 185 N.J. 275, 2005 N.J. LEXIS 1458

Supreme Court of New Jersey·Decided November 3, 2005·Published

Opinion

ORDER

The Disciplinary Review Board having filed with the Court its decision in DRB 05-060, concluding that JOSEPH J. LaROSA of MARLTON, who was admitted to the bar of this State in 1993, should be reprimanded for violating RPC 1.5(a) and (c) (excessive fee), and good cause appearing;

It is ORDERED that JOSEPH J. LaROSA 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

[276] ORDERED that respondent reimburse the Disciplinary Oversight Committee for appropriate administrative costs incurred in the prosecution of this matter.

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 05-060, concluding that JOSEPH J. LaROSA of MARLTON, who was admitted to the bar of this State in 1993, should be reprimanded for violating RPC 1.5(a) and (c) (excessive fee), and good cause appearing;

It is ORDERED that JOSEPH J. LaROSA 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

[276] ORDERED that respondent reimburse the Disciplinary Oversight Committee for appropriate administrative costs incurred in the prosecution of this matter.

In re Larosa, 884 A.2d 1253, 185 N.J. 275, 2005 N.J. LEXIS 1458 (N.J. 2005).

Pincite

884 A.2d 1253 (In re Larosa) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.