In re Starkman

Supreme Court of New Jersey

In re Starkman

688 A.2d 1042, 147 N.J. 558, 1997 N.J. LEXIS 64

Supreme Court of New Jersey·Decided February 26, 1997·Published

Opinion

[559] ORDER

The Disciplinary Review Board on December 20, 1996, having filed with the Court its decision concluding that MORRIS STARKMAN of CHERRY HILL, who was admitted to the bar of this State in 1972, should be reprimanded for violating RPC 1.7 (conflict of interest) and good cause appearing;

It is ORDERED that MORRIS STARKMAN is hereby reprimanded; 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

[559] ORDER

The Disciplinary Review Board on December 20, 1996, having filed with the Court its decision concluding that MORRIS STARKMAN of CHERRY HILL, who was admitted to the bar of this State in 1972, should be reprimanded for violating RPC 1.7 (conflict of interest) and good cause appearing;

It is ORDERED that MORRIS STARKMAN is hereby reprimanded; 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.

In re Starkman, 688 A.2d 1042, 147 N.J. 558, 1997 N.J. LEXIS 64 (N.J. 1997).

Pincite

688 A.2d 1042 (In re Starkman) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.