In re Waters-Cato

726 A.2d 259, 158 N.J. 12, 1999 N.J. LEXIS 464
CourtSupreme Court of New Jersey
DecidedApril 7, 1999
StatusPublished

This text of 726 A.2d 259 (In re Waters-Cato) 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 Waters-Cato, 726 A.2d 259, 158 N.J. 12, 1999 N.J. LEXIS 464 (N.J. 1999).

Opinion

ORDER

The Disciplinary Review Board on February 3, 1999, having filed with the Court its decision concluding that SHIRLEY L. WATERS-CATO of MAPLEWOOD, who was admitted to the bar of this State in 1977, and who was suspended from the practice of law for a period of three years effective October 22, 1997, and who remains suspended at this time, should be suspended from the practice of law for a period of three months for violating RPC 1.1(a) (gross neglect), RPC 1.3 (lack of diligence), RPC 1.4(a) (failure to communicate), and RPC 8.1(b) (failure to cooperate with ethics authorities);

And the Disciplinary Review Board having further concluded that on reinstatement to practice respondent should be required to practice under supervision indefinitely;

And good cause appearing;

[13]*13It is ORDERED that SHIRLEY L. WATERS-CATO is suspended from the practice of law for a period of three months, and until further Order of the Court, effective October 22, 2000; and it is further

ORDERED that the Court’s Orders of April 4, 1995, October 20,1995, and October 15,1997, shall remain in effect and are made a part of this Order; and it is further

ORDERED that on reinstatement to practice respondent shall practice under supervision 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 suspension and that respondent comply with Rule 1:20-20; and it is further

ORDERED 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

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
726 A.2d 259, 158 N.J. 12, 1999 N.J. LEXIS 464, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-waters-cato-nj-1999.