In re Steiert

Supreme Court of New Jersey

In re Steiert

987 A.2d 616, 201 N.J. 119

DecidedFebruary 16, 2010

StatusPublished

This text of 987 A.2d 616 (In re Steiert) 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 Steiert, 987 A.2d 616, 201 N.J. 119 (N.J. 2010).

Pincite

Opinion

ORDER

The Disciplinary Review Board having filed with the Court its decision in DRB 09-135, concluding that GEOFFREY L. STEIERT of YOORHEES, who was admitted to the bar of this State in 1980, should be reprimanded for violating RPC 4.1 (false statement of material fact or law to third person), RPC 5.5(a) (unauthorized practice of law), and RPC 8.4(c) (conduct involving dishonesty, fraud, deceit, or misrepresentation), and good cause appearing;

It is ORDERED that GEOFFREY L. STEIERT 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 and actual [120]*120expenses 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

ORDER

The Disciplinary Review Board having filed with the Court its decision in DRB 09-135, concluding that GEOFFREY L. STEIERT of YOORHEES, who was admitted to the bar of this State in 1980, should be reprimanded for violating RPC 4.1 (false statement of material fact or law to third person), RPC 5.5(a) (unauthorized practice of law), and RPC 8.4(c) (conduct involving dishonesty, fraud, deceit, or misrepresentation), and good cause appearing;

It is ORDERED that GEOFFREY L. STEIERT 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 and actual [120]*120expenses incurred in the prosecution of this matter, as provided in Rule 1:20-17.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

987 A.2d 616, 201 N.J. 119, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-steiert-nj-2010.