Case ID: nj_184/html/0389-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

877 A.2d 1232
    IN THE MATTER OF VINCENT M. YACAVINO, AN ATTORNEY AT LAW
    (ATTORNEY NO. 220211964).
    July 22, 2005.
   ORDER

The Disciplinary Review Board having filed with the Court its decision in DRB 04-426, concluding that VINCENT M. YACAVINO of MENDHAM, who was admitted to the bar of this State in 1964, should be suspended from the practice of law for a period of six months for violating RPC 3.1 (filing a frivolous complaint), RPC 3.2 (failing to expedite litigation), RPC 3.4(g) (presenting or threatening to present criminal charges to obtain an improper advantage in a civil matter), RPC 3.5(c)(engaging in conduct intended to disrupt a tribunal), and RPC 8.4(d) (engaging in conduct prejudicial to the administration of justice);

And the Disciplinary Review Board further having concluded that prior to reinstatement to practice, respondent should be required to provide proof of his fitness to practice law;

And good cause appearing;

It is ORDERED that VINCENT M. YACAVINO is suspended from the practice of law for a period of six months and until the further Order of the Court, effective August 15, 2005; and it is further

ORDERED that prior to reinstatement to practice, respondent shall provide proof of his fitness to practice law as attested to by a mental health professional approved by the Office of Attorney Ethics; 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 pursuant to Rule l:20-20(c), respondent’s fa.ilure to comply with the Affidavit of Compliance requirement of Rule l:20-20(b)(15) may (1) preclude the Disciplinary Review Board from considering respondent’s petition for reinstatement for a period of up to six months from the date respondent files proof of compliance; (2) be found to constitute a violation of RPC 8.1(b) and RPC 8.4(c); and (3) provide a basis for an action for contempt pursuant to Rule 1:10-2; 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 incurred in the prosecution of this matter.