From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

In re Smith

Supreme Court of New Jersey
Sep 23, 2022
252 N.J. 64 (N.J. 2022)

Opinion

D-75 September Term 2021 086757

09-23-2022

In the MATTER OF Brian J. SMITH, an Attorney at Law (Attorney No. 017501993)


ORDER

The Disciplinary Review Board having filed with the Court its decision in DRB 21-194, concluding on the record certified to the Board pursuant to Rule 1:20-4 (f) (default by respondent), that Brian J. Smith of Huntingdon Valley, Pennsylvania, who was admitted to the bar of this State in 1994, and who has been suspended from the practice of law since March 7, 2022, should be suspended from practice for a period of six months, consecutive to the one-year term of suspension imposed by Order of the Court filed February 11, 2022, based on respondent's violation of RPC 1.1(a) (gross neglect), RPC 1.3 (lack of diligence), RPC 1.4 (b) (failure to keep client reasonably informed about the status of a matter), RPC 1.16 (a)(1) (failure to withdraw from representation if the representation will result in a violation of the RPCs or other law), RPC 3.4 (d) (failure to comply with discovery requests), RPC 5.5 (a)(1) (unauthorized practice of law), and RPC 8.1(d) (failure to cooperate with disciplinary authorities);

And good cause appearing;

It is ORDERED that Brian J. Smith is suspended from the practice of law for a period of six months, effective March 7, 2023, pending his compliance with the Order filed February 11, 2022, and until the further Order of the Court; 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 of RPC 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.


Summaries of

In re Smith

Supreme Court of New Jersey
Sep 23, 2022
252 N.J. 64 (N.J. 2022)
Case details for

In re Smith

Case Details

Full title:In the Matter of Brian J. Smith, An Attorney At Law (Attorney No…

Court:Supreme Court of New Jersey

Date published: Sep 23, 2022

Citations

252 N.J. 64 (N.J. 2022)
282 A.3d 365