In re Neff

Supreme Court of New Jersey

In re Neff

883 A.2d 1046, 185 N.J. 241, 2005 N.J. LEXIS 1173

DecidedOctober 19, 2005

StatusPublished

This text of 883 A.2d 1046 (In re Neff) 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 Neff, 883 A.2d 1046, 185 N.J. 241, 2005 N.J. LEXIS 1173 (N.J. 2005).

Pincite

Opinion

ORDER

The Disciplinary Review Board having filed with the Court its decision in DRB-05-124, concluding that H. ALTON NEFF of BRICK, who was admitted to the bar of this State in 1967, should be censured for violating RPC 3.2 (failure to treat with courtesy and consideration all persons involved in the legal process) and RPC 3.4(g) (presenting or threatening to present criminal charges to obtain an improper advantage in a civil matter), and good cause appearing;

It is ORDERED that H. ALTON NEFF 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 incurred in the prosecution of this matter.

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-05-124, concluding that H. ALTON NEFF of BRICK, who was admitted to the bar of this State in 1967, should be censured for violating RPC 3.2 (failure to treat with courtesy and consideration all persons involved in the legal process) and RPC 3.4(g) (presenting or threatening to present criminal charges to obtain an improper advantage in a civil matter), and good cause appearing;

It is ORDERED that H. ALTON NEFF 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 incurred in the prosecution of this matter.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

883 A.2d 1046, 185 N.J. 241, 2005 N.J. LEXIS 1173, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-neff-nj-2005.