answer, resulting in the entry of a final judgment against his client; the attorney never informed his client of the judgment; violations of RPC 1.1(a), RPC 1.3, and RPC 1.4(b); notwithstanding the presence of some mitigation in the attorney's favor, the attorney received a reprimand because of the "obvious, significant harm to the client," that is, the judgment); In re Burstein, 214 N.J. 46 (2013) (reprimand for attorney guilty of gross neglect, lack of diligence, and failure to communicate with the client; although the attorney had no disciplinary record, the significant economic harm to the client justified a reprimand); In re Coffey, 206 N.J. 324 (2011) (on a motion for discipline by consent, reprimand imposed for attorney's gross neglect, lack of diligence, and failure to adequately communicate with clients in three matters; prior admonition; mitigating factors included the attorney's admission of wrongdoing, his discharge from his employment, and his parents' failing health); In re Shapiro, 201 N.J. 201 (2010) (reprimand for misconduct in two client matters; in one matter, the attorney engaged in gross neglect and lack of diligence by failing to probate a will, settle the estate, and re-file pleadings that had been rejected by the court; in the second matter, the attorney failed to set forth in writing the basis or rate of his fee and lacked diligence by failing to forward his client's discovery responses to defense counsel and by failing to oppose the defendant's motions to dismiss the complaint, which were granted; in both matters, the attorney failed to communicate with his clients; prior reprimand); and In re Uffelman, 200 N.J. 260 (2009) (reprimand imposed for gross neglect, lack of diligence, and failure to communicate with a client; although the attorney had no disciplinary record, the reprimand was premised on the extensive harm caused to the client, who was forced to shut down his business for three months as a result of the attorney's misconduct). There are, however, aggravating f

See, e.g., In re Russell, 201 N.J. 409 (2009) (admonition for attorney whose failure to file answers to divorce complaints against her client caused a default judgment to be entered against him; the attorney also failed to explain to the client the consequences flowing from her failure to file answers on his behalf); In the Matter of Keith T. Smith, DRB 08-187 (October 1, 2008) (admonition imposed when attorney's inaction in a personal injury suit caused the dismissal of the client's complaint; the attorney took no steps to have it reinstated; also, the attorney did not communicate with the client about the status of the case); In re Dargay, 188 N.J. 273 (2006) (admonition for attorney guilty of gross neglect, lack of diligence, and failure to communicate with the client; prior admonition for similar conduct); In re Shapiro, 201 N.J. 201 (2010) (reprimand for attorney's misconduct in two client matters; in one matter, he engaged in gross neglect and lacked diligence by failing to probate the decedent's will, to settle the estate, and to re-file pleadings that had been rejected by the court; in the second matter, he failed to set forth in writing the basis or rate of his fee and lacked diligence by failing to forward his client's discovery responses to defense counsel and by failing to oppose the defendant's motions to dismiss the complaint, which were granted; in both matters, he failed to communicate with his clients); In re Uffelman, 200 N.J. 260 (2009) (reprimand for attorney guilty of gross neglect, lack of diligence, and failure to communicate with a client; although the attorney had no disciplinary record, the reprimand was premised on the extensive harm caused to the client, who was forced to shut down his business for three months because of the attorney's failure to represent the client's interests diligently and re