In Re Senick

Supreme Court of New Jersey

In Re Senick

36 A.3d 1061, 209 N.J. 228, 2012 WL 611618, 2012 N.J. LEXIS 159

Supreme Court of New Jersey·Decided February 27, 2012·No. D-79 September Term 2011·Published

Opinion

ORDER

MICHAEL R. SENICK of TEANECK, who was admitted to the bar of this State in 1973, having pleaded guilty in the United States District Court for the District of New Jersey, to one count of bank fraud, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1344, good cause appearing;

It is ORDERED that pursuant to Rule l:20-13(b)(l), MICHAEL R. SENICK is temporarily suspended from the practice of law pending the final resolution of ethics proceedings against him, effective immediately and until the further Order of this Court; and it is further

ORDERED that MICHAEL R. SENICK be restrained and enjoined from practicing law during the period of his suspension; and it is further

*229 ORDERED that MICHAEL R. SENICK comply with Rule 1:20-20 dealing with suspended attorneys; and it is further

ORDERED that the entire record of this matter be made a permanent part of respondent’s file as an attorney of this State.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

ORDER

MICHAEL R. SENICK of TEANECK, who was admitted to the bar of this State in 1973, having pleaded guilty in the United States District Court for the District of New Jersey, to one count of bank fraud, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1344, good cause appearing;

It is ORDERED that pursuant to Rule l:20-13(b)(l), MICHAEL R. SENICK is temporarily suspended from the practice of law pending the final resolution of ethics proceedings against him, effective immediately and until the further Order of this Court; and it is further

ORDERED that MICHAEL R. SENICK be restrained and enjoined from practicing law during the period of his suspension; and it is further

*229 ORDERED that MICHAEL R. SENICK comply with Rule 1:20-20 dealing with suspended attorneys; and it is further

ORDERED that the entire record of this matter be made a permanent part of respondent’s file as an attorney of this State.

In Re Senick, 36 A.3d 1061, 209 N.J. 228, 2012 WL 611618, 2012 N.J. LEXIS 159 (N.J. 2012).

Pincite

36 A.3d 1061 (In Re Senick) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related