In re Murray

Supreme Court of New Jersey

In re Murray

174 A.3d 972, 231 N.J. 232

CourtSupreme Court of New Jersey

DecidedDecember 8, 2017

DocketD–162 Sept. Term 2016; 079538

StatusPublished

This text of 174 A.3d 972 (In re Murray) 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 Murray, 174 A.3d 972, 231 N.J. 232 (N.J. 2017).

Pincite

Opinion

The Disciplinary Review Board having filed with the Court its decision in DRB 16-383, concluding on the record certified to the Board pursuant to Rule 1:20-4(f)(default by respondent) that JOHN J. MURRAY, JR. , of SOUTH AMBOY , who was admitted to the bar of this State in 1998, should be reprimanded for violating RPC 8.1(b) (failure to cooperate with disciplinary authorities) and RPC 1.15(d) (recordkeeping violations;

And good cause appearing;

It is ORDERED that JOHN J. MURRAY, JR. , 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 *973expenses 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

The Disciplinary Review Board having filed with the Court its decision in DRB 16-383, concluding on the record certified to the Board pursuant to Rule 1:20-4(f)(default by respondent) that JOHN J. MURRAY, JR. , of SOUTH AMBOY , who was admitted to the bar of this State in 1998, should be reprimanded for violating RPC 8.1(b) (failure to cooperate with disciplinary authorities) and RPC 1.15(d) (recordkeeping violations;

And good cause appearing;

It is ORDERED that JOHN J. MURRAY, JR. , 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 *973expenses incurred in the prosecution of this matter, as provided in Rule 1:20-17.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

174 A.3d 972, 231 N.J. 232, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-murray-nj-2017.