From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

In re McCarthy

Supreme Court of New Jersey.
Jan 15, 2020
240 N.J. 261 (N.J. 2020)

Opinion

D-163 September Term 2018 083332

01-15-2020

In the MATTER OF Daniel J. MCCARTHY, an Attorney at Law (Attorney No. 023201984)


ORDER

The Disciplinary Review Board having filed with the Court its decision in DRB 18-399, concluding that as a matter of reciprocal discipline pursuant to Rule 1:20-14(a)(E), Daniel J. McCarthy of North Wildwood, who was admitted to the bar of this State in 1984, should be suspended from the practice of law for a period of two years, based on discipline imposed in Delaware for unethical conduct that in New Jersey constitutes the violation of RPC 3.3(a)(2) (failing to disclose a material fact to a tribunal when disclosure is necessary to avoid assisting in an illegal, criminal, or fraudulent act), RPC 3.3(a)(4) (offering evidence the lawyer knows to be false and failing to take reasonable remedial measures if he lawyer learns that the evidence is false), RPC 3.3(a) (unlawfully obstructing another party's access to evidence or concealing a document having potentially evidentiary value), RPC 3.4(c) (knowingly disobeying an obligation under the rules of a tribunal), RPC 4.1(a)(2) (failing to disclose a material fact to a third person to avoid a criminal or fraudulent act by a client), 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 Daniel J. McCarthy is suspended from the practice of law for a period of two years, effective immediately, 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 McCarthy

Supreme Court of New Jersey.
Jan 15, 2020
240 N.J. 261 (N.J. 2020)
Case details for

In re McCarthy

Case Details

Full title:In the MATTER OF Daniel J. MCCARTHY, an Attorney at Law (Attorney No…

Court:Supreme Court of New Jersey.

Date published: Jan 15, 2020

Citations

240 N.J. 261 (N.J. 2020)
222 A.3d 635