LAW.coLAW.co

IN THE MATTER OF NEIL I. STERNSTEIN, AN ATTORNEY AT LAW

Supreme Court of New Jersey1995-07-07
141 N.J. 15660 A.2d 1153

Summary

Holding. The court suspended the attorney from practice for three months, effective July 31, 1995, and imposed conditions requiring supervised practice for one year following reinstatement, along with reimbursement of disciplinary costs.

An attorney admitted to practice in 1975 was found to have engaged in professional misconduct across four client matters. The violations included gross neglect of client matters, failure to pursue cases with appropriate diligence, and inadequate communication with clients. Additionally, the attorney failed to cooperate fully with disciplinary investigators.

Summary generated by law.co from the public-domain opinion. The opinion text itself is public domain.

Key issues

  • Gross neglect of client matters
  • Lack of diligence in prosecution of cases
  • Failure to maintain client communication
  • Failure to cooperate with ethics authorities

Procedural posture

The Disciplinary Review Board filed a report recommending discipline, and the court adopted the recommendation with an order imposing suspension and additional conditions.

Authorities cited

No cited authorities resolved to law.co cases yet.

Opinion

majority opinion

ORDER

The Disciplinary Review Board having filed a report with the Court on April 28, 1995, recommending that NEIL I. STERN-STEIN of WOODBURY, who was admitted to the bar of this State in 1975, be suspended from the practice of law for a period of three months for violation of RPC 1.1(a) (gross neglect), RPC 1.3 (lack of diligence) and RPC 1.4 (failure to communicate) in four matters, and RPC 8.1(b) (failure to cooperate with the ethics authorities);

And the Disciplinary Review Board further recommending that on reinstatement to practice respondent practice under the supervision of a practicing attorney for a period of one year;

And good cause appearing;

It is ORDERED that NEIL I. STERNSTEIN is hereby suspended from the practice of law for a period of three months, effective July 31, 1995, and until further Order of the Court; and it is further

ORDERED that on reinstatement to practice, respondent, practice under the supervision of a practicing attorney approved by the Office of Attorney Ethics for a period of one year and until 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 be restrained and enjoined from practicing law during the period of his suspension and that he comply with Rule 1:20-20; and it is further

ORDERED that respondent reimburse the Disciplinary Oversight Committee for appropriate administrative costs incurred in the prosecution of this matter.