From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

In re Gourvitz

Supreme Court of New Jersey
Sep 10, 2009
200 N.J. 261 (N.J. 2009)

Summary

finding that the absence of any evidence with respect to whether the attorney's $350 consultation fee was or was not unreasonable precluded a determination that it was unreasonable under RPC 1.5

Summary of this case from In re Franco

Opinion

September 10, 2009.


ORDER

The Disciplinary Review Board having filed with the Court its decision in DRB 08-326, concluding that ELLIOT H. GOURVITZ of SHORT HILLS, who was admitted to the bar of this State in 1969, should be reprimanded for violating RPC 1.5(a) (a lawyer's fee shall be reasonable), RPC 1.16(d) (a lawyer must take reasonable steps upon termination of representation to protect a client's interests, including refunding any advance payment of fee that has not been earned or incurred), and RPC 8.4(a) (a lawyer shall not violate or attempt to violate the Rules of Professional Conduct), and good cause appearing;

It is ORDERED that ELLIOT H. GOURVITZ is hereby reprimanded; 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 Gourvitz

Supreme Court of New Jersey
Sep 10, 2009
200 N.J. 261 (N.J. 2009)

finding that the absence of any evidence with respect to whether the attorney's $350 consultation fee was or was not unreasonable precluded a determination that it was unreasonable under RPC 1.5

Summary of this case from In re Franco
Case details for

In re Gourvitz

Case Details

Full title:IN THE MATTER OF ELLIOT H. GOURVITZ, AN ATTORNEY AT LAW

Court:Supreme Court of New Jersey

Date published: Sep 10, 2009

Citations

200 N.J. 261 (N.J. 2009)
979 A.2d 330

Citing Cases

In re Franco

In this case, Robert, an experienced matrimonial lawyer, spent just over seven hours preparing a notice of…

In re Cameron

RPC 1.5(a) does, however, apply to an attorney who, in a matrimonial matter, enters into a fee agreement with…