In re Strupp

Supreme Court of New Jersey

In re Strupp

686 A.2d 1186, 147 N.J. 267, 1997 N.J. LEXIS 7

DecidedJanuary 15, 1997

StatusPublished

This text of 686 A.2d 1186 (In re Strupp) 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 Strupp, 686 A.2d 1186, 147 N.J. 267, 1997 N.J. LEXIS 7 (N.J. 1997).

Pincite

Opinion

ORDER

The Disciplinary Review Board on November 4, 1996, having filed with the Court its decision concluding that ANDREW D. STRUPP of SALT POINT, NEW YORK, who was admitted to the bar of this State in 1973, should be reprimanded for violations of RPC 3.3 (lack of candor to a tribunal), RPC 5.5 (unauthorized practice of law), and RPC 8.4(c) (conduct involving dishonesty, fraud, deceit, or misrepresentation), and good cause appearing;

It is ORDERED that ANDREW D. STRUPP 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

[268]*268ORDERED 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

ORDER

The Disciplinary Review Board on November 4, 1996, having filed with the Court its decision concluding that ANDREW D. STRUPP of SALT POINT, NEW YORK, who was admitted to the bar of this State in 1973, should be reprimanded for violations of RPC 3.3 (lack of candor to a tribunal), RPC 5.5 (unauthorized practice of law), and RPC 8.4(c) (conduct involving dishonesty, fraud, deceit, or misrepresentation), and good cause appearing;

It is ORDERED that ANDREW D. STRUPP 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

[268]*268ORDERED that respondent reimburse the Disciplinary Oversight Committee for appropriate administrative costs incurred in the prosecution of this matter.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

686 A.2d 1186, 147 N.J. 267, 1997 N.J. LEXIS 7, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-strupp-nj-1997.