In re Power

795 A.2d 849, 171 N.J. 470, 2002 N.J. LEXIS 537
CourtSupreme Court of New Jersey
DecidedApril 29, 2002
StatusPublished
Cited by2 cases

This text of 795 A.2d 849 (In re Power) 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 Power, 795 A.2d 849, 171 N.J. 470, 2002 N.J. LEXIS 537 (N.J. 2002).

Opinion

ORDER

This matter having been duly presented to the Court pursuant to Rule 1:20—10(b), following a motion for discipline by consent of JOHN M. POWER of PARAMUS, who was admitted to the bar of this State in 1992;

And the Committee on Attorney Advertising and respondent having signed a stipulation of discipline by consent in which it was agreed that respondent violated RPC 7.1(a)(1)(making false and misleading communications about lawyer’s services) and Opinion 25, 153 N.J.L.J. 1298, 7 N.J.L. 2250 (1998);

And the parties having agreed that respondent’s conduct violated RPC 7.1(a)(1) and Opinion 25, 153 N.J.L.J. 1298, 7 N.J.L. 2250 (1998), and that said conduct warrants a reprimand;

And the parties having agreed that for a period of two years respondent should submit any and all advertisements, solicitations, flyers and related communications to the Committee on Attorney Advertising for pre-publication approval pursuant to Rule 1:19A-2(d) and Rule 1:19A-3;

[471]*471And the Disciplinary Review Board having determined that a reprimand is the appropriate discipline for respondent’s ethics violations and having granted the motion for discipline by consent;

And the Disciplinary Review Board having determined that for a period of two years respondent should submit any and all advertisements, solicitations, flyers and related communications to the Committee on Attorney Advertising for pre-publication approval;

And the Disciplinary Review Board having submitted the record of the proceedings to the Clerk of the Supreme Court for the entry of an order of discipline in accordance with Rule. 1:20-16(e);

And good cause appearing;

It is ORDERED that JOHN M. POWER of PARAMUS is hereby reprimanded; and it is further

ORDERED that for a period of two years respondent shall submit for approval to the Committee on Attorney Advertising all proposed advertisements, solicitations, flyers and related communications for his practice, effective immediately and until further Order of the Court; 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

Related

In re Hyderally
32 A.3d 1117 (Supreme Court of New Jersey, 2011)
In re Power
3 A.D.3d 21 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2003)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
795 A.2d 849, 171 N.J. 470, 2002 N.J. LEXIS 537, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-power-nj-2002.