In re Visconti

Supreme Court of New Jersey

In re Visconti

112 A.2d 267, 17 N.J. 555, 1955 N.J. LEXIS 314

DecidedMarch 7, 1955

StatusPublished

This text of 112 A.2d 267 (In re Visconti) 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 Visconti, 112 A.2d 267, 17 N.J. 555, 1955 N.J. LEXIS 314 (N.J. 1955).

Pincite

Opinion

Per Curiam.

After a hearing the Passaic County Ethics and Grievance Committee found and presented that Anthony J. Visconti, an attorney practicing in that county, was guilty of unprofessional conduct in that he received from Mrs. Anna Hinken certain sums of money upon a representation that he would invest it for her in good first mortgages but failed to do so. His practice was to deliver to her forged bonds and inform her that he was retaining the mortgages [556]*556for the purposes of having them recorded. The loss sustained by Mrs. Hinken was $28,200.

We are also informed that other complaints have been made, that respondent has been indicted and that the total of his defalcations amount to approximately $102,500. The respondent has absconded and his whereabouts are unknown.

In the circumstances his name is ordered stricken from the roll of attorneys.

For disbarment — Chief Justice Vanderbilt, and Justices Wachenebld, Burling, Jacobs and Brennan — 5. For suspension — Justices Heher and Oliphant — 2.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Per Curiam.

After a hearing the Passaic County Ethics and Grievance Committee found and presented that Anthony J. Visconti, an attorney practicing in that county, was guilty of unprofessional conduct in that he received from Mrs. Anna Hinken certain sums of money upon a representation that he would invest it for her in good first mortgages but failed to do so. His practice was to deliver to her forged bonds and inform her that he was retaining the mortgages [556]*556for the purposes of having them recorded. The loss sustained by Mrs. Hinken was $28,200.

We are also informed that other complaints have been made, that respondent has been indicted and that the total of his defalcations amount to approximately $102,500. The respondent has absconded and his whereabouts are unknown.

In the circumstances his name is ordered stricken from the roll of attorneys.

For disbarment — Chief Justice Vanderbilt, and Justices Wachenebld, Burling, Jacobs and Brennan — 5. For suspension — Justices Heher and Oliphant — 2.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

112 A.2d 267, 17 N.J. 555, 1955 N.J. LEXIS 314, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-visconti-nj-1955.