In re Monzo

Supreme Court of New Jersey

In re Monzo

80 A.3d 371, 216 N.J. 331, 2013 WL 6284387, 2013 N.J. LEXIS 1198

Supreme Court of New Jersey·Decided December 5, 2013·Published

Opinion

ORDER

The Disciplinary Review Board having filed with the Court its decision in DRB 13-060, concluding that ANTHONY P. MONZO of CAPE MAY COURTHOUSE, who was admitted to the bar of this State in 1987, should be reprimanded for violating RPC 1.8 (conflict of interest: business transactions with current clients), and good cause appearing;

It is ORDERED that ANTHONY P. MONZO 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

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 13-060, concluding that ANTHONY P. MONZO of CAPE MAY COURTHOUSE, who was admitted to the bar of this State in 1987, should be reprimanded for violating RPC 1.8 (conflict of interest: business transactions with current clients), and good cause appearing;

It is ORDERED that ANTHONY P. MONZO 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

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.

In re Monzo, 80 A.3d 371, 216 N.J. 331, 2013 WL 6284387, 2013 N.J. LEXIS 1198 (N.J. 2013).

Pincite

80 A.3d 371 (In re Monzo) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.