In re Mariconda

Supreme Court of New Jersey

In re Mariconda

947 A.2d 1215, 195 N.J. 11

DecidedMay 30, 2008

StatusPublished

This text of 947 A.2d 1215 (In re Mariconda) 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 Mariconda, 947 A.2d 1215, 195 N.J. 11 (N.J. 2008).

Pincite

Opinion

CORRECTED ORDER

The Disciplinary Review Board having filed with the Court its decision in DRB 07-390, concluding that ALAN J. MARICONDA of PATERSON, who was admitted to the bar of this State in 1978, should be reprimanded for violating RPC 5.3(a) and (b) (failure to supervise non-attorney employees), RPC 1.15(a) (negligent misappropriation), RPC 1.15(d) and Rule 1:21-6 (recordkeeping violations);

And the Court having determined from its review of the matter that the appropriate quantum of discipline is an admonition;

And good cause appearing;

It is ORDERED that ALAN J. MARICONDA is hereby admonished; 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