In the Matter of Shaffer

995 A.2d 299, 202 N.J. 46
CourtSupreme Court of New Jersey
DecidedMay 6, 2010
DocketD-28 September Term 2009, 065060
StatusPublished
Cited by1 cases

This text of 995 A.2d 299 (In the Matter of Shaffer) 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 Shaffer, 995 A.2d 299, 202 N.J. 46 (N.J. 2010).

Opinion

ORDER

The Disciplinary Review Board having filed with the Court its decision in DRB 09-119, recommending the disbarment of HAL J. SHAFFER, formerly of CHERRY HILL, who was admitted to the bar of this State in 1983, for violating RPC 1.15(a) (knowing misappropriation of trust funds), RPC 8.4(e) (conduct involving dishonesty, fraud, deceit or misrepresentation), and the principles of In re Hollendonner, 102 N.J. 21, 504 A.2d 1174 (1985), and In re Wilson, 81 N.J. 451, 409 A.2d 1153 (1979);

And HAL J. SHAFFER having been ordered to show cause why he should not be disbarred or otherwise disciplined, and good cause appearing;

It is ORDERED that HAL J. SHAFFER be disbarred, effective immediately, and that his name be stricken from the roll of attorneys;

ORDERED that all funds, if any, currently existing or hereinafter deposited in any New Jersey financial institution maintained by HAL J. SHAFFER pursuant to Rule 1:21-6 be restrained from disbursement except on application to this Court, for good cause shown, and shall be transferred by the financial institution to the Clerk of the Superior Court, who is directed to deposit the funds in the Superior Court Trust Fund pending the further Order of this Court; and it is further

ORDERED that HAL J. SHAFFER be and hereby is permanently retrained and enjoined from practicing law; and it further

ORDERED that respondent comply with Rule 1:20-20 dealing with disbarred attorneys; and it is further

*47 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

Related

In Re Morris
995 A.2d 299 (Supreme Court of New Jersey, 2010)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
995 A.2d 299, 202 N.J. 46, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-the-matter-of-shaffer-nj-2010.