In re Saluti

Supreme Court of New Jersey

In re Saluti

134 A.3d 444, 224 N.J. 454, 2016 N.J. LEXIS 482

DecidedMay 5, 2016

StatusPublished

This text of 134 A.3d 444 (In re Saluti) 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 Saluti, 134 A.3d 444, 224 N.J. 454, 2016 N.J. LEXIS 482 (N.J. 2016).

Pincite

Opinion

ORDER

The Disciplinary Review Board having filed with the Court its decision in DRB 15-120, concluding that GERALD M. SALUTI, formerly of NEWARK, who was admitted to the bar of this State [455]*455in 1992, and who has been suspended from the practice of law since February 28, 2014, by Order of the Court filed January 31, 2014, violated RPC 1.5(b) (failure to provide client with a writing setting forth the basis or rate of the fee), and that he should receive no additional discipline for the single violation of RPC 1.5(b), the Board having determined that said violation would not have increased the three-month term of suspension ordered on January 31, 2014, had the violation been considered with that matter;

And good cause appearing;

It is ORDERED that no additional discipline be imposed for respondent’s unethical conduct in DRB 15-120.

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 15-120, concluding that GERALD M. SALUTI, formerly of NEWARK, who was admitted to the bar of this State [455]*455in 1992, and who has been suspended from the practice of law since February 28, 2014, by Order of the Court filed January 31, 2014, violated RPC 1.5(b) (failure to provide client with a writing setting forth the basis or rate of the fee), and that he should receive no additional discipline for the single violation of RPC 1.5(b), the Board having determined that said violation would not have increased the three-month term of suspension ordered on January 31, 2014, had the violation been considered with that matter;

And good cause appearing;

It is ORDERED that no additional discipline be imposed for respondent’s unethical conduct in DRB 15-120.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

134 A.3d 444, 224 N.J. 454, 2016 N.J. LEXIS 482, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-saluti-nj-2016.