In Re McGinnis

Supreme Court of New Jersey

In Re McGinnis

295 A.2d 201, 61 N.J. 459, 1972 N.J. LEXIS 189

Supreme Court of New Jersey·Decided October 10, 1972·Published·Cited by 4 cases

Opinion

Per Curiam.

Respondent pleaded guilty to a charge of uttering a forged instrument and one of embezzlement. As a result of a plea bargain, seven other similar charges were dismissed. All the charges involved substantial defalcations of moneys entrusted to him. A custodial sentence was imposed.

When we were first apprised of the charges, we suspended respondent from practice until our further order. The mat *460 ter is now before us on the final discipline to be imposed. Nothing less than disbarment will suffice.

It is therefore ordered that respondent’s name be stricken from the roll.

For disbarment — Chief Justice Weintraub, Justices Jacobs, Proctor, Hall and Mountain, and Judges Conford and Sullivan — 7.

Opposed — None.

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

Per Curiam.

Respondent pleaded guilty to a charge of uttering a forged instrument and one of embezzlement. As a result of a plea bargain, seven other similar charges were dismissed. All the charges involved substantial defalcations of moneys entrusted to him. A custodial sentence was imposed.

When we were first apprised of the charges, we suspended respondent from practice until our further order. The mat *460 ter is now before us on the final discipline to be imposed. Nothing less than disbarment will suffice.

It is therefore ordered that respondent’s name be stricken from the roll.

For disbarment — Chief Justice Weintraub, Justices Jacobs, Proctor, Hall and Mountain, and Judges Conford and Sullivan — 7.

Opposed — None.

In Re McGinnis, 295 A.2d 201, 61 N.J. 459, 1972 N.J. LEXIS 189 (N.J. 1972).

Pincite

295 A.2d 201 (In Re McGinnis) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related