Case ID: nj_182/html/0039-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

861 A.2d 108
    IN THE MATTER OF JOHN M. DELAURENTIS, AN ATTORNEY AT LAW (ATTORNEY NO. 001261980).
    November 29, 2004.
   ORDER

The Disciplinary Review Board having filed with the Court its decision in DRB 03-439 and 04-110, concluding that JOHN M. DeLAURENTIS of CAMDEN, who was admitted to the bar of this State in 1980, and who thereafter was suspended from the practice of law for a period of one year effective October 7, 2002, by Order of the Court filed September 9, 2002, and who remains suspended to this date, should be reprimanded in DRB 03-439 for violating RPC 8.4(b) (commission of a criminal act that reflects adversely on a lawyer’s honesty, trustworthiness, or fitness as a lawyer) and suspended from the practice of law for a period of three months in DRB 04-110 for violating RPC 1.3 (lack of diligence), RPC 1.4(a) (failure to communicate with client), RPC 1.7(a) and (b) (conflict of interest), RPC 1.15(b) (failure to notify a third person of receipt of funds and to promptly deliver funds), and RPC 5.3(a) and (b) (failure to supervise an employee);

And respondent having been ordered to show cause why he should not be disbarred or otherwise discipline;

And the Court having determined on its own review that a one-year suspension from practice is warranted;

And good cause appearing;

It is ORDERED that JOHN M. DeLAURENTIS is suspended from the practice of law for a period of one year and until the further Order of the Court, effective immediately; and it is further

ORDERED that respondent continue to be restrained and enjoined from practicing law during the period of suspension and that he continue to comply with Rule 1:20-20; and it is further

ORDERED that pursuant to Rule l:20-20(c), respondent’s failure 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 prior to reinstatement to practice, respondent shall demonstrate that he is fit to practice law, as attested to by a mental health professional approved by the Office of Attorney Ethics; 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.