In re Weinberg

Supreme Court of New Jersey

In re Weinberg

982 A.2d 967, 200 N.J. 432

DecidedNovember 18, 2009

StatusPublished

This text of 982 A.2d 967 (In re Weinberg) 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 Weinberg, 982 A.2d 967, 200 N.J. 432 (N.J. 2009).

Pincite

Opinion

ORDER

The Disciplinary Review Board having filed with the Court its decision in DRB 09-110, concluding that ROBERT P. WEINBERG of BAYONNE, who was admitted to the bar of this State in 1967, should be censured for violating RPC 1.5(b) (failure to communicate in writing the basis or rate of the fee), RPC 1.7(a)(2) and RPC 1.8(a) (conflict of interest), and RPC 1.15(a) (commingling of trust and personal funds), and good cause appearing;

It is ORDERED that ROBERT P. WEINBERG is hereby censured; 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 reimburse the Disciplinary Oversight Committee for appropriate administrative costs and actual expenses incurred in the prosecution of this matter, as provided in Rule 1:20-17.

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

ORDER

The Disciplinary Review Board having filed with the Court its decision in DRB 09-110, concluding that ROBERT P. WEINBERG of BAYONNE, who was admitted to the bar of this State in 1967, should be censured for violating RPC 1.5(b) (failure to communicate in writing the basis or rate of the fee), RPC 1.7(a)(2) and RPC 1.8(a) (conflict of interest), and RPC 1.15(a) (commingling of trust and personal funds), and good cause appearing;

It is ORDERED that ROBERT P. WEINBERG is hereby censured; 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 reimburse the Disciplinary Oversight Committee for appropriate administrative costs and actual expenses incurred in the prosecution of this matter, as provided in Rule 1:20-17.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

982 A.2d 967, 200 N.J. 432, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-weinberg-nj-2009.