From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

In re Schroll

Supreme Court of New Jersey.
Apr 17, 2013
213 N.J. 391 (N.J. 2013)

Opinion

2013-04-17

In the Matter Of Bryan C. SCHROLL, An Attorney At Law (Attorney No. 047401992).


ORDER

The Disciplinary Review Board having filed with the Court its decision in DRB 12–204, concluding that BRYAN C. SCHROLL of VOORHEES, who was admitted to the bar of this State in 1992, should be censured for violating RPC 1.1(a) (gross neglect); RPC 1.3(lack of diligence); RPC 1.4(b)(failure to communicate with client); RPC 4.1(a)(1)(false statement of fact to third person); RPC 8.4(c)(dishonesty, fraud, deceit or misrepresentation); and RPC 8.1(a)(misrepresentations to ethics authorities);

And BRYAN C. SCHROLL having been ordered to show cause why he should not be disbarred or otherwise disciplined;

And good cause appearing;

It is ORDERED that BRYAN C. SCHROLL is hereby censured; 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 Schroll

Supreme Court of New Jersey.
Apr 17, 2013
213 N.J. 391 (N.J. 2013)
Case details for

In re Schroll

Case Details

Full title:In the Matter Of Bryan C. SCHROLL, An Attorney At Law (Attorney No…

Court:Supreme Court of New Jersey.

Date published: Apr 17, 2013

Citations

213 N.J. 391 (N.J. 2013)
63 A.3d 1217

Citing Cases

In re Velahos

A reprimand or censure, however, is typically imposed for a misrepresentation to disciplinary authorities, so…

In re Toto

hics grievance filed by a former client); In re DeSeno, 205 N.J. 91 (2011) (reprimand for attorney who…