In re Persiano

182 A.3d 936, 233 N.J. 78
CourtSupreme Court of New Jersey
DecidedApril 24, 2018
DocketD–36 September Term 2017; 080294
StatusPublished

This text of 182 A.3d 936 (In re Persiano) 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 Persiano, 182 A.3d 936, 233 N.J. 78 (N.J. 2018).

Opinion

The Disciplinary Review Board having filed with the Court its decision in DRB 17-169, concluding that as a matter of final discipline pursuant to Rule 1:20-13(c), MARIO J. PERSIANO, III, of HAINESPORT , who was admitted to the bar of this State in 2005, should be suspended from the practice of law for a period of three months based on respondent' guilty plea in the Superior Court of New Jersey, Camden County, to fourth-degree obstructing the administration of law or other governmental function in violation of N.J.S.A. 2C:29-1, conduct that violates RPC 8.4(b) (commission of a criminal act that reflects adversely on the lawyer's honesty, trustworthiness or fitness as a lawyer), and RPC 8.4(c) (conduct involving dishonesty, fraud, deceit or misrepresentation;

And good cause appearing;

It is ORDERED that MARIO J. PERSIANO, III, is suspended from the practice of law for a period of three months, effective May 22, 2018, and until the further Order of the Court; and it is further

ORDERED that respondent comply with Rule 1:20-20 dealing with suspended attorneys; and it is further

ORDERED that pursuant to Rule 1:20-20(c), respondent's failure to comply with the Affidavit of Compliance requirement of Rule 1:20-20(b)(15) may (1) preclude the Disciplinary Review Board from considering respondent's petition for reinstatement for a period of up to six months from the date respondent files proof of compliance; (2) be found to constitute a violation of **79RPC 8.1(b) and RPC 8.4(d) ; and (3) provide a basis for an action for contempt pursuant to Rule 1:10-2; and it is further

ORDERED that the entire record of this matter be made a permanent part of *937respondent'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

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
182 A.3d 936, 233 N.J. 78, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-persiano-nj-2018.