Opinion
D-60 080464
06-19-2018
IN THE MATTER OF STEPHEN HAROLD LANKENAU, AN ATTORNEY AT LAW (Attorney No. 030912003)
CORRECTED ORDER
The Disciplinary Review Board having filed with the Court its decision in DRB 16-442 and DRB 17-143, concluding that as a matter of reciprocal discipline pursuant to Rule 1:20-14(a)(4)(E), STEPHEN HAROLD LANKENAU of WILIMINGTON, DELAWARE, who was admitted to the bar of this State in 2004, should be suspended from the practice of law for a prospective period of two years based on discipline imposed in the state of Delaware for unethical conduct that in New Jersey constitutes violations of RPC 1.15(a)(failure to safeguard funds), RPC 1.15(b)(failure to promptly notify clients or third persons of receipt of funds in which they have an interest and to promptly disburse those funds), RPC 3.3(a)(1)(false statement of material fact to a tribunal), RPC 3.4(c)(knowingly disobeying an obligation under the rules of a tribunal), RPC 8.4(b)(commission of a criminal act that reflects adversely on the lawyer's honesty, trustworthiness or fitness as a lawyer), RPC 8.4(c)(conduct involving dishonesty, fraud, deceit or misrepresentation), and RPC 8.4(d)(conduct prejudicial to the administration of justice);
And the Court having determined from its review of the matter that the two-year term of suspension should be retroactive to the effective date of respondent's suspension from practice in Delaware and that respondent should not be reinstated to practice in New Jersey unless and until he is reinstated to practice in Delaware;
And good cause appearing;
It is ORDERED that STEPHEN HAROLD LANKENAU is suspended from the practice of law for a period of two years, retroactive to February 22, 2016, and until the further Order of the Court; and it is further
ORDERED that STEPHEN HAROLD LANKENAU shall not be reinstated to the practice of law in New Jersey unless and until he is reinstated to the practice of law in Delaware; 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.
WITNESS, the Honorable Stuart Rabner, Chief Justice, at Trenton, this 19th day of June, 2018.
/s/
CLERK OF THE SUPREME COURT