From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

In re Klamo

Supreme Court of New Jersey.
Jan 10, 2018
175 A.3d 966 (N.J. 2018)

Opinion

D–185 September Term 2016 079647

01-10-2018

In the MATTER OF John A. KLAMO, an Attorney at Law (Attorney No. 009161982)


ORDER

The Disciplinary Review Board having filed with the Court its decision in DRB 16–443, concluding on the record certified by the Board pursuant Rule 1:20–4 (f) (default by respondent), that JOHN A. KLAMO of CHERRY HILL , who was admitted to the bar of this State in 1982, should be suspended from the practice of law for a period of three months for violating RPC 1.1(a) (gross neglect), RPC 1.2(a) (failure to abide by a client's decision concerning the scope and objectives of the representation), RPC 1.3 (lack of diligence), RPC 1.4(b) (failure to keep a client reasonably informed about the status of a matter), RPC 5.5(a) and Rule 1:21–1A(a)(3)(unauthorized practice of law), RPC 8.4(c) (conduct involving dishonesty, fraud, deceit or misrepresentation), and RPC 8.4(d) (conduct prejudicial to the administration of justice); and good cause appearing;

It is ORDERED that JOHN A. KLAMO is suspended from the practice of law for a period of three months, effective February 9, 2018, 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 Klamo

Supreme Court of New Jersey.
Jan 10, 2018
175 A.3d 966 (N.J. 2018)
Case details for

In re Klamo

Case Details

Full title:In the MATTER OF John A. KLAMO, an Attorney at Law (Attorney No. 009161982)

Court:Supreme Court of New Jersey.

Date published: Jan 10, 2018

Citations

175 A.3d 966 (N.J. 2018)
175 A.3d 966

Citing Cases

In re John

He also failed to obtain his client's permission before retaining an entity to prepare an appellate brief, in…