In re Duffy

4 Citing cases

  1. In re Duffy

    Docket No. DRB 18-174 (N.J. Jul. 24, 2018)

    In 2011, however, he received a reprimand for lack of diligence, failure to communicate with clients, and failure to return unearned fees to those clients, in five client matters. In re Duffy, 208 N.J. 431 (2011). Therefore, based on the principles of progressive discipline and the fact that respondent, after all these years, seems not to have learned from his prior missteps, the Board determined that a censure is the appropriate level of discipline for respondent's misconduct.

  2. In re Tarter

    Docket No. DRB 17-174 (N.J. Jul. 26, 2017)

    See, e.g., In the Matter of Sean Lawrence Branigan, DRB 14-088 (June 23, 2014) (admonition for failure to send the client an invoice for the time spent on her matrimonial case and ignoring her e-mail and telephone calls); In the Matter of Carl G. Zoecklein, DRB 16-167 (September 22, 2016) (admonition imposed on attorney who, among other violations, failed to cooperate with the ethics investigation); In re Duffy, 208 N.J. 431 (2011) (reprimand for misconduct in five client matters, including failure to return unearned fees; prior admonition); In re Girdler, 179 N.J. 227 (2004); and In the Matter of Richard B. Girdler, DRB 03-278 (November 20, 2003) (slip op. at 6) (threshold measure of discipline for an attorney's failure to file a R. 1:20-20(b)(15) affidavit is a reprimand). Moreover, in 2014, respondent received a three-month suspension, which involved conduct similar to his conduct in this matter.

  3. In re Albano

    Docket No. DRB 16-078 (N.J. May. 24, 2016)

    See, e.g., In re Duffy, 208 N.J. 431 (2011) (reprimand for misconduct in five matters; gross neglect in four matters, lack of diligence in one matter, failure to communicate with a client in three matters, failure to return unearned fees in three matters, and pattern of neglect; the attorney had lost control of his practice as the result of alcoholism following bariatric bypass surgery, but finally sought treatment for his addiction; prior admonition); In re Tyler, 204 N.J. 629 (2011) (reprimand for misconduct in six bankruptcy cases; the attorney was found guilty of gross neglect, lack of diligence, failure to communicate with clients, and directly communicating with a represented client about a disgorgement order; mitigation included the attorney's lack of a disciplinary history and struggles with medical and mental health issues at the time of the misconduct); In re McBride, 188 N.J. 389 (2006) (reprimand for misconduct in five matters, which included gross neglect, pattern of neglect, failure to keep clients reasonably info

  4. In re Roberts

    Docket No. DRB 14-345 (N.J. Jun. 11, 2015)

    See, e.g., In re Duffy, 208 N.J. 431 (reprimand for misconduct in five client matters, including failure to return unearned fees, gross neglect, lack of diligence, and failure to communicate with clients; prior admonition; compelling mitigating circumstances considered); In re Nichols, 182 N.J. 433 (2005) (reprimand for misconduct in two immigration matters, which included failure to return an unearned fee and failure to communicate with clients; prior reprimand); In re Schiavo, 165 N.J. 533 (2000) (three-month suspension in a default, involving four client matters; misconduct included failure to return an unearned fee, failure to promptly deliver funds to a third party, failure to comply with a court order to disburse escrow funds, failure to communicate with clients, failure to act with reasonable diligence, and misrepresentation of the status of a matter; temporary suspension for failure to cooperate with an ethics investigation); and In re Anqelucci, 194 N.J. 512 (2008) (six-month suspension in a default matter; fa