From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

In re Chirnomas

Supreme Court of New Jersey
May 16, 2023
No. D-138-21 (N.J. May. 16, 2023)

Opinion

D-138-21

05-16-2023

In the Matter of Morton Chirnomas, An Attorney At Law (Attorney No. 045061990)


ORDER

The Disciplinary Review Board having filed with the Court its decision in DRB 20-249, recommending that as a matter of reciprocal discipline, pursuant to Rule 1:20- 14(a)(4), that Morton Chirnomas of Clifton, who was admitted to the bar of this State in 1990, should be suspended from the practice of law for a period of six months for violating RPC 1.3 (lack of diligence), RPC 1,4(b)(failure to keep a client reasonably informed about the status of a matter and to comply with reasonable requests for information), RPC 1.15(a)(commingling), RPC 1.16(d)(upon termination of representation, failing to take steps to the extent reasonably practicable to protect a client's interests), RPC 8.1(b)(failing to cooperate with disciplinary authorities), and RPC 8.4(c)(engaging in conduct involving dishonesty, fraud, deceit or misrepresentation);

And the Court having further determined that any petition for reinstatement shall provide a certification of whether the USPTO filing fee has been refunded to FZU; and good cause appearing;

It is ORDERED that Morton Chirnomas is suspended from the practice of law for a period of six months, and until the further Order of the Court, effective June 12, 2023; and it is further

ORDERED that any petition for reinstatement shall provide a certification of whether the USPTO filing fee has been refunded to FZU; and it is further ORDERED that respondent comply with Rule 1:20-20 dealing with suspended attorneys; and it is further

ORDERED that pursuant to Rule 1:20-20(c), respondent's failure to comply with the Affidavit of Compliance requirement of Rule 1:20-20(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 ofRPC 8.1(b) and RPC 8.4(d); 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 and actual expenses incurred in the prosecution of this matter, as provided in Rule 1:20-17.

WITNESS, the Honorable Stuart Rabner, Chief Justice, at Trenton, this 2ndday of May, 2023.


Summaries of

In re Chirnomas

Supreme Court of New Jersey
May 16, 2023
No. D-138-21 (N.J. May. 16, 2023)
Case details for

In re Chirnomas

Case Details

Full title:In the Matter of Morton Chirnomas, An Attorney At Law (Attorney No…

Court:Supreme Court of New Jersey

Date published: May 16, 2023

Citations

No. D-138-21 (N.J. May. 16, 2023)