In Re Soriano
This text of 19 A.3d 983 (In Re Soriano) 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.
Opinion
ORDER
The Disciplinary Review Board having filed with the Court its decision in DRB 10-369, concluding that WILLIAM J. SORIANO of ROSELAND, who was admitted to the bar of this State in 1975, should be censured for violating RPC 1.2(d) (assisting a client in fraudulent conduct), RPC 1.5(b) (failing to explain the rate or basis of a fee in writing), RPC 1.7 (conflict of interest), RPC 1.15(b) (failing to deliver funds promptly to clients), RPC 4.1(a)(1) (making a false statement of material fact or law to a third person), RPC 8.4(a) (violating the Rules of Professional Conduct), and RPC 8.4(c) (engaging in conduct involving dishonesty, fraud, deceit or misrepresentation);
And good cause appearing;
It is ORDERED that WILLIAM J. SORIANO is hereby censured; 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
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
19 A.3d 983, 206 N.J. 138, 2011 N.J. LEXIS 636, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-soriano-nj-2011.