In Re Yormark

287 A.2d 4, 60 N.J. 175, 1972 N.J. LEXIS 232
Supreme Court of New Jersey·Decided February 7, 1972·Published·Cited by 9 cases

Opinion

Pee Curiam.

The respondent was convicted of criminal offenses in connection with a conspiracy to defraud an insurance carrier. The convictions were affirmed by the Appellate Division, 117 N. J. Super. 313 (1971), and we have denied certification. 60 N. J. 138 (1972).

The misconduct requires an order of disbarment, and it is so ordered.

We are advised that respondent intends to seek further review of the convictions in other tribunals. Should he prevail in those efforts, he may apply to us for reconsideration of this order.

For disbarment—Chief Justice Weinteaub and Justices Jacobs, Francis, Proctoe, Hall, Schettino and Mountain—7.

Opposed—Hone.

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

In Re Yormark, 287 A.2d 4, 60 N.J. 175, 1972 N.J. LEXIS 232 (N.J. 1972).

287 A.2d 4 (In Re Yormark) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Matter of Zauber
583 A.2d 1140 (Supreme Court of New Jersey, 1991)
Matter of Surgent
518 A.2d 215 (Supreme Court of New Jersey, 1986)
United States v. Friedland
502 F. Supp. 611 (D. New Jersey, 1980)
Passanante v. Yormark
350 A.2d 497 (New Jersey Superior Court App Division, 1975)
Tormo v. Yormark
398 F. Supp. 1159 (D. New Jersey, 1975)
In Re Toplitt
306 A.2d 446 (Supreme Court of New Jersey, 1973)
In Re Zwillman
293 A.2d 657 (Supreme Court of New Jersey, 1972)
Travel Agts. Malpractice v. Regal Cul. Soc.
287 A.2d 4 (New Jersey Superior Court App Division, 1972)
Metropolitan Life Insurance Company v. Wenckus
244 A.2d 424 (Supreme Judicial Court of Maine, 1968)