In re Noto

Supreme Court of New Jersey

In re Noto

608 A.2d 895, 128 N.J. 607, 1992 N.J. LEXIS 1447

DecidedJuly 10, 1992

StatusPublished

This text of 608 A.2d 895 (In re Noto) 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 Noto, 608 A.2d 895, 128 N.J. 607, 1992 N.J. LEXIS 1447 (N.J. 1992).

Pincite

Opinion

ORDER

The Disciplinary Review Board having filed a report with the Court, recommending in light of the age of this matter and other mitigating factors, that JOSEPH C. NOTO of RIDGE-WOOD, who was admitted to the bar of this State in 1968, be publicly reprimanded for acting with a conflict of interest, for making misrepresentations and for the breach of a fiduciary duty, in violation of DR 1-102(A)(4) and DR 5-105, and good cause appearing;

It is ORDERED that the report and recommendation of the Disciplinary Review are adopted and JOSEPH C. NOTO is hereby publicly 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 shall reimburse the Ethics Financial 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 a report with the Court, recommending in light of the age of this matter and other mitigating factors, that JOSEPH C. NOTO of RIDGE-WOOD, who was admitted to the bar of this State in 1968, be publicly reprimanded for acting with a conflict of interest, for making misrepresentations and for the breach of a fiduciary duty, in violation of DR 1-102(A)(4) and DR 5-105, and good cause appearing;

It is ORDERED that the report and recommendation of the Disciplinary Review are adopted and JOSEPH C. NOTO is hereby publicly 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 shall reimburse the Ethics Financial Committee for appropriate administrative costs incurred in the prosecution of this matter.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

608 A.2d 895, 128 N.J. 607, 1992 N.J. LEXIS 1447, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-noto-nj-1992.