; In re Hancock, DRB 14-022 (August 20, 2014) (imposing reciprocal discipline of a six-month suspension upon an attorney who allowed a disbarred attorney to "assist him in his law office, as a paralegal" and to advertise as such) at 3, 5, so ordered, 221 N.J. 259 (2015).
The OAE acknowledged that respondent received a one-year suspension in New York, but recommended a six-month suspension, contending that such a sanction was the usual discipline for New Jersey attorneys who assist suspended or disbarred attorneys in the unauthorized practice of law. In support of its recommendation, the OAE relied on In re Hancock, 221 N.J. 259 (2015), and the cases cited therein. In Hancock, a motion for reciprocal discipline matter, a New York attorney aided Burton Pugach, a disbarred New York attorney, in the unauthorized practice of law by hiring Pugach as a paralegal.
Many RPC 5.5(a)(2) cases involve attorneys who assist disbarred lawyers in the continued practice of law, attorneys whose employees engaged in the practice of law, or attorneys who lent their names to organizations engaged in the unauthorized practice of law. See, e.g., In re Hancock, 221 N.J. 259 (2015) (attorney assisted a disbarred attorney in the unauthorized practice of law by permitting him to serve as a paralegal; in that position, the disbarred attorney prepared criminal motions, among other documents; he also violated RPC 1.5(b) (failure to use a written fee agreement) and RPC 8.4(c)); In re Krain, 216 N.J. 585 (2014) (attorney hired a paralegal with knowledge of and experience in immigration law; the paralegal interviewed clients, gave them advice, completed forms, compiled exhibits, and prepared and signed the attorney's name on retainer agreements, correspondence, and pleadings; violation of RPC 5.5(a)(2); the attorney also violated RPC 5.3(a)-(c) (failure to supervise a nonlawyer employee), RPC 7.3(d) (improper fee sharing), and RPC 8.4(c)); and In re Hecker, 205 N.J. 263 (2011) (attorney permitted a collection agency to use his name in its efforts to collect unpaid debts
included Bevacqua's relative inexperience at the time of the misconduct and his lack of venality); In re Ezon, 172 N.J. 235 (2002) (reprimand imposed on attorney for assisting a disbarred lawyer (his father) in the practice of law; by executing a stipulation, Ezon misled the court and other attorneys that, along with his father, he represented the client; in mitigation, we considered the fact that the disbarred lawyer that Ezon assisted was his father); In re Belmont, 158 N.J. 183 (1999) (reprimand for attorney who assisted his partner, a Pennsylvania attorney, in the unauthorized practice of law by permitting him to settle eight personal injury cases in New Jersey; the attorney also improperly calculated his contingent fee on the recovery, improperly endorsed his clients' names on settlement checks in five cases, failed to deposit the settlement checks in a trust account in New Jersey, failed to maintain a bona fide office in New Jersey, and failed to turn over a file to a client); In re Hancock, 221 N.J. 259 (2015) (motion for reciprocal discipline; six-month suspension for attorney who assisted Burton Pugach, a disbarred lawyer, in the unauthorized practice of law; the client "hired" Pugach to represent her in a matrimonial matter; at Pugach's request, Hancock appeared at appellate oral argument, where he misrepresented that he had been retained on a pro bono basis, when he had received $1,000 for the representation; he also failed to prepare a written fee agreement in that matter; in a separate matter, Hancock signed bankruptcy petitions that Pugach had prepared for another client and failed to supervise Pugach, who later "unlawfully conducted[ed] the bankruptcy proceedings" in Hancock's name; Hancock also made conflicting, false, and misleading statements to the bankruptcy court about his and Pugach's involvement in the bankruptcy matter); In re Kronegold, 197 N.J. 22 (2008) (companion case to Hancock; six-month suspension, on a motion for reciprocal discipline, for attorney who assisted the
See, e.g., In re Ezon, 172 N.J. 235 (2002) (reprimand imposed on attorney for assisting a disbarred lawyer (his father) in the practice of law; by executing a stipulation, the attorney misled the court and other attorneys that, along with his father, he represented the client; in mitigation, we considered the fact that the disbarred lawyer that the attorney assisted was his father); In re Hancock, 221 N.J. 259 (2015) and In re Kroneqold, 197 N.J. 22 (2008) (companion cases) (motions for reciprocal discipline; six-month suspensions for attorneys who assisted a disbarred attorney in the unauthorized practice of law; the clients "hired" the disbarred attorney, who paid Hancock and Kronegold to provide legal services; in one matter, Hancock appeared for oral argument, at the disbarred attorney's request, and made a misrepresentation to the court, claiming he was representing the client pro bono; the disbarred attorney then prepared and filed a brief with the appellate court, using Kronegold's name and purported signature; in another matter, Hancock failed to supervise the disbarred attorney, allowing him, as a "paralegal" in his firm, to conduct bankruptcy proceedings under Hancock's name; Hancock also made misrepresentations to the bankruptcy court regarding the disbarred attorney's role in the proceedings; in mitigation, we considered the passage of time (ten to twelve years) since the misconduct
See, e.g., In re Bevacqua, 174 N.J. 296 (2002) (reprimand for attorney who assigned an unlicensed lawyer to prepare a client for a deposition and to appear on the client's behalf; attorney committed other violations, including gross neglect, pattern of neglect, and lack of diligence; mitigating factors included the attorney's lack of disciplinary history, his inexperience as a lawyer, and his lack of venality); In re Ezor, 172 N.J. 235 (2002) (reprimand for attorney who knowingly assisted his father, a disbarred New Jersey attorney, in presenting himself as an attorney in a New Jersey litigation); In re Hancock, 221 N.J. 259 (2015) (motion for reciprocal discipline; six-month suspension for attorney who, in addition to assisting a disbarred attorney in the unauthorized practice of law, made multiple misrepresentations to judges and failed to prepare a written fee agreement in a civil family action, as required by R. 5:3-5(a) and RPC 1.5(b); this matter was a companion case to the Kronegold matter, infra); In re Kronegold, 197 N.J. 22 (2008) (motion for reciprocal discipline; six-month suspension for attorney who assisted a disbarred attorney in the unauthorized practice of law; the client had "hired" the disbarred attorney, who paid Kronegold for legal services; Kronegold signed a notice of appeal for the client, at the disbarred attorney's request; the disbarred attorney then prepared and filed a brief with the appellate court, using Kronegold's name and purported signature; prior reprimand); and In re Cermack, 174 N.J. 560 (2003) (on motion for discipline by consent, attorney received a six-month suspension