In re Van Sciver

Supreme Court of New Jersey

In re Van Sciver

726 A.2d 255, 158 N.J. 4, 1999 N.J. LEXIS 280

DecidedMarch 24, 1999

StatusPublished

This text of 726 A.2d 255 (In re Van Sciver) 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 Van Sciver, 726 A.2d 255, 158 N.J. 4, 1999 N.J. LEXIS 280 (N.J. 1999).

Pincite

Opinion

ORDER

The Disciplinary Review Board on August 24, 1998, having filed with the Court its decision concluding that HARVEY VAN SCIVER, JR., of ALBUQUERQUE, NEW MEXICO, who was admitted to the bar of this State in 1980, and who was transferred to disability inactive status by Order of this Court dated September 7, 1995, and who remains on inactive status to date, should be suspended from the practice of law for a period of three months for violating RPC 5.5(a) (practicing while on the ineligible list) and RPC 8.1(b) (failing to cooperate with ethics authorities);

And the Disciplinary Review Board having further concluded that respondent should be returned to disability inactive status at the conclusion of the three month suspension;

And good cause appearing;

It is ORDERED that HARVEY VAN SCIVER, JR., is suspended from the practice of law for a period of three months, and until further Order of the Court, effective immediately; and it is further

ORDERED that at the conclusion of the three-month suspension, respondent shall be returned to disability inactive status until further Order of the Court; 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 be restrained and enjoined from practicing law during the period of his suspension and that he comply with Rule 1:20-20; and it is further

[5]*5ORDERED 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 August 24, 1998, having filed with the Court its decision concluding that HARVEY VAN SCIVER, JR., of ALBUQUERQUE, NEW MEXICO, who was admitted to the bar of this State in 1980, and who was transferred to disability inactive status by Order of this Court dated September 7, 1995, and who remains on inactive status to date, should be suspended from the practice of law for a period of three months for violating RPC 5.5(a) (practicing while on the ineligible list) and RPC 8.1(b) (failing to cooperate with ethics authorities);

And the Disciplinary Review Board having further concluded that respondent should be returned to disability inactive status at the conclusion of the three month suspension;

And good cause appearing;

It is ORDERED that HARVEY VAN SCIVER, JR., is suspended from the practice of law for a period of three months, and until further Order of the Court, effective immediately; and it is further

ORDERED that at the conclusion of the three-month suspension, respondent shall be returned to disability inactive status until further Order of the Court; 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 be restrained and enjoined from practicing law during the period of his suspension and that he comply with Rule 1:20-20; and it is further

[5]*5ORDERED 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)

726 A.2d 255, 158 N.J. 4, 1999 N.J. LEXIS 280, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-van-sciver-nj-1999.