In re Macaluso

Supreme Court of New Jersey

In re Macaluso

963 A.2d 815, 197 N.J. 427, 2009 N.J. LEXIS 269

DecidedJanuary 20, 2009

StatusPublished

This text of 963 A.2d 815 (In re Macaluso) 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 Macaluso, 963 A.2d 815, 197 N.J. 427, 2009 N.J. LEXIS 269 (N.J. 2009).

Pincite

Opinion

ORDER

The Disciplinary Review Board having filed with the Court its decision in DRB 07-387, concluding that ROY R. MACALUSO of PASSAIC, who was admitted to the bar of this State in 1987, should be censured for violating RPC 5.3(a) (failure of law firm to adopt and maintain reasonable efforts to ensure that the conduct of nonlawyer employees is compatible with the lawyer’s professional obligations), RPC 5.4(a) (sharing legal fees with a nonlaw-yer), RPC 7.3(d) (compensating or giving something of value to a person to recommend the lawyer’s employment by a client or as a reward for having made a recommendation resulting in the lawyer’s employment by a client), and RPC 8.3(a) (failing to inform disciplinary authorities of another lawyer’s violation of the Rules of Professional Conduct that raises a substantial question as to [428]*428that lawyer’s honesty, trustworthiness, or fitness as a lawyer), and good cause appearing;

It is ORDERED that ROY R. MACALUSO is hereby censured; 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 07-387, concluding that ROY R. MACALUSO of PASSAIC, who was admitted to the bar of this State in 1987, should be censured for violating RPC 5.3(a) (failure of law firm to adopt and maintain reasonable efforts to ensure that the conduct of nonlawyer employees is compatible with the lawyer’s professional obligations), RPC 5.4(a) (sharing legal fees with a nonlaw-yer), RPC 7.3(d) (compensating or giving something of value to a person to recommend the lawyer’s employment by a client or as a reward for having made a recommendation resulting in the lawyer’s employment by a client), and RPC 8.3(a) (failing to inform disciplinary authorities of another lawyer’s violation of the Rules of Professional Conduct that raises a substantial question as to [428]*428that lawyer’s honesty, trustworthiness, or fitness as a lawyer), and good cause appearing;

It is ORDERED that ROY R. MACALUSO is hereby censured; 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)

963 A.2d 815, 197 N.J. 427, 2009 N.J. LEXIS 269, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-macaluso-nj-2009.