In Re Warner

Supreme Court of New Jersey

In Re Warner

203 A.2d 259, 43 N.J. 254, 1964 N.J. LEXIS 149

Supreme Court of New Jersey·Decided September 22, 1964·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

Pek CuRIAM.

The respondent was convicted of grand theft, a felony, in the Superior Court of California. On appeal the conviction was affirmed. People v. Warner, 134 Cal. App. 2d 829, 286 P. 2d 560 (D. Ct. App. 1955). The Supreme Court of the United States denied his application for a writ of certiorari. Warner v. California, 351 U. S. 912, 76 S. Ct. 701, 100 L. Ed. 1446 (1956). The respondent has offered his resignation from the bar of this State but in the circumstances that offer is unacceptable.

The order of the court is that the name of the respondent be stricken from the roll of attorneys.

For disbarment — Chief Justice WeiNTRAub, and Justices Jaoobs, FraNois, Proctor, Hail, SohettiNo and HaNemaN —7. Opposed — None.

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

Pek CuRIAM.

The respondent was convicted of grand theft, a felony, in the Superior Court of California. On appeal the conviction was affirmed. People v. Warner, 134 Cal. App. 2d 829, 286 P. 2d 560 (D. Ct. App. 1955). The Supreme Court of the United States denied his application for a writ of certiorari. Warner v. California, 351 U. S. 912, 76 S. Ct. 701, 100 L. Ed. 1446 (1956). The respondent has offered his resignation from the bar of this State but in the circumstances that offer is unacceptable.

The order of the court is that the name of the respondent be stricken from the roll of attorneys.

For disbarment — Chief Justice WeiNTRAub, and Justices Jaoobs, FraNois, Proctor, Hail, SohettiNo and HaNemaN —7. Opposed — None.

In Re Warner, 203 A.2d 259, 43 N.J. 254, 1964 N.J. LEXIS 149 (N.J. 1964).

Pincite

203 A.2d 259 (In Re Warner) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related