In re Pavliv

Supreme Court of New Jersey

In re Pavliv

72 A.3d 244, 215 N.J. 299, 2013 WL 4777313, 2013 N.J. LEXIS 839

DecidedSeptember 5, 2013

StatusPublished

This text of 72 A.3d 244 (In re Pavliv) 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 Pavliv, 72 A.3d 244, 215 N.J. 299, 2013 WL 4777313, 2013 N.J. LEXIS 839 (N.J. 2013).

Pincite

Opinion

ORDER

The Disciplinary Review Board having filed with the Court its decision in DRB 13-001, concluding that ALEX PAVLIV of HOWELL, who was admitted to the bar of this State in 1983, should be reprimanded for violating RPC 3.4(c) (knowingly disobeying an obligation under the rules of a tribunal) and RPC 3.3(a)(5) (failure to disclose to a tribunal a material fact knowing that the omission is reasonably certain to mislead the tribunal), and good cause appearing;

[300]*300It is ORDERED that ALEX PAVLIV 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 13-001, concluding that ALEX PAVLIV of HOWELL, who was admitted to the bar of this State in 1983, should be reprimanded for violating RPC 3.4(c) (knowingly disobeying an obligation under the rules of a tribunal) and RPC 3.3(a)(5) (failure to disclose to a tribunal a material fact knowing that the omission is reasonably certain to mislead the tribunal), and good cause appearing;

[300]*300It is ORDERED that ALEX PAVLIV 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.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

72 A.3d 244, 215 N.J. 299, 2013 WL 4777313, 2013 N.J. LEXIS 839, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-pavliv-nj-2013.