Opinion ID: 2258708
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 3

Heading: General Attorney Discipline Procedures

Text: This Court has both the authority and obligation to oversee the discipline of attorneys admitted to the New Jersey Bar. N.J. Const. art. 6, § 2, ¶ 3; see also R. 1:20-1(a) (Every [New Jersey] attorney... shall be subject to the disciplinary jurisdiction of the Supreme Court....). We exercise our authority through the OAE, the Disciplinary Review Board (DRB), the Disciplinary Oversight Committee, the District Ethics Committees, and the fee arbitration committees. R. 1:20-1(a). The overarching goal of the disciplinary system is to protect the public from unfit lawyers and promote public confidence in our legal system. In re Gallo, 178 N.J. 115, 122, 835 A. 2d 682 (2003). A grievance against an attorney is handled at the initial stage by a District Ethics Committee secretary. R. 1:20-3(d). The secretary must evaluate all information received by inquiry, grievance or from other sources alleging attorney unethical conduct or incapacity. R. 1:20-3(e)(1). The secretary dockets the grievance if the allegations, assuming they are true, amount to misconduct. Ibid. Once a matter is docketed, a member of a District Ethics Committee is assigned to investigate. R. 1:20-3(g)(1). At the conclusion of the initial investigation, the investigator must provide a written report, including a recommendation, to the chair of the District Ethics Committee. R. 1:20-3(h). The chair must then determine whether there is a reasonable prospect of a finding of unethical conduct by clear and convincing evidence. [1] R. 1:20-4(a); see also R. 1:20-3(h). If there is not, the matter is dismissed, and the facts and reasons for dismissal are provided to the respondent attorney, the grievant, and the Director of the OAE. R. 1:20-3(h). On the other hand, if the chair concludes that evidence supports a finding that the respondent attorney committed unethical conduct, then the chair must classify the attorney's actions as either minor unethical conduct or unethical conduct. R. 1:20-3(i)(1). Minor unethical conduct involves actions by the respondent attorney that, if proven, would not warrant a sanction greater than a public admonition. R. 1:20-3(i)(2)(A). Upon such a finding, the District Ethics Committee chair may request that the OAE Director divert the matter and approve an agreement in lieu of discipline. R. 1:20-3(i)(2)(B)(iii). The agreement may impose certain conditions on the respondent attorney, including reimbursement of fees or costs, completion of legal work, participation in [an] alcohol or drug rehabilitation program, psychological counseling or satisfactory completion of a course of study. Ibid. Fulfillment of the terms of the agreement will result in dismissal of the ethics matter. Ibid. If the attorney fails to comply with the agreement, the matter will be reinstated and processed as unethical conduct. R. 1:20-3(i)(2)(C). The chair of the District Ethics Committee notifies the grievant that the matter has been diverted, and the grievant may submit comments to the Director. R. 1:20-3(i)(2)(B)(i). The existence and substance of the diversion agreement remain confidential. R. 1:20-9(a). Unethical conduct involves a more serious breach of attorney ethics, such as when the respondent attorney commits a crime or an act involving dishonesty, fraud, or deceit; takes action that could result in substantial prejudice to a client or other person without restitution by the attorney; or knowingly misappropriates funds. R. 1:20-3(i)(2)(A). Unless the respondent attorney agrees to discipline by consent, a formal complaint is issued by either the District Ethics Committee or the OAE Director. R. 1:20-3(i)(3)(B); R. 1:20-4. A three-member panel then conducts public hearings, R. 1:20-6(a)(1), (c)(2)(F), after which the panel may dismiss the complaint, recommend an admonition, or recommend more severe discipline, R. 1:20-6(c)(2)(E). If the panel recommends discipline, the matter is referred to the OAE Director for transmittal to the DRB. R. 1:20-6(c)(2)(E)(ii), (iii). The DRB reviews any appeals and recommendations for discipline, R. 1:20-15(e), (f), and makes specific determinations on the appropriate sanctions to be imposed, including suspensions, censures, reprimands, and admonitions, R. 1:20-15A(a)(2) to (6). When the DRB concludes that disbarment is warranted, it must present the matter to the Supreme Court as a recommendation. R. 1:20-16(a). Finally, in addition to the consideration of recommendations for disbarment, the Court may review all other DRB determinations. R. 1:20-16(b). B.