In the Matter of Hediger

997 A.2d 225, 202 N.J. 336
CourtSupreme Court of New Jersey
DecidedJuly 19, 2010
DocketD-109 September Term 2009, 066179
StatusPublished
Cited by1 cases

This text of 997 A.2d 225 (In the Matter of Hediger) 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 the Matter of Hediger, 997 A.2d 225, 202 N.J. 336 (N.J. 2010).

Opinion

ORDER

The Disciplinary Review Board having filed with the Court its decision in DRB-10-054, concluding that DANIEL DAVID HEDIGER of EDGEWATER, who was admitted to the bar of this State in 1995, should be censured for violating RPC 1.3 (lack of diligence);

And the Disciplinary Review Boai’d further concluded that respondent should continue to practice under the supervision of a *337 practicing attorney approved by the Office of Attorney Ethics as ordered by the Court on July 17, 2007;

And good cause appearing;

It is ORDERED that DANIEL DAVID HEDIGER is hereby censured; and it is further

ORDERED that respondent shall continue to practice under the supervision of a practicing attorney approved by the Office of Attorney Ethics until the 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 reimburse the Disciplinary Oversight Commit tee 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

Related

In Re Cerza
997 A.2d 225 (Supreme Court of New Jersey, 2010)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
997 A.2d 225, 202 N.J. 336, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-the-matter-of-hediger-nj-2010.