Opinion
D-78 September Term 2022 088264
09-12-2023
In the MATTER OF Robert James STACK, An Attorney at Law (Attorney No. 039121996)
ORDER The Disciplinary Review Board having filed with the Court its decision in DRB 23-005 and DRB 23-006, concluding on the records certified to the Board pursuant to Rule 1:20-14(f) (default by respondent) that Robert James Stack, formerly of Kinnelon, who was admitted to the bar of this State in 1996, and who has been suspended since November 19, 2020, should be suspended from the practice of law for a period of two years for violating RPC 1.1(a) (gross neglect), RPC 1.3 (lack of diligence), RPC 1.4(b) (failure to communicate with a client), RPC 1.4(c) (failure to explain a matter to the extent reasonably necessary to permit the client to make informed decisions), RPC 1.15(a) (negligent misappropriation of client funds), RPC 1.15(d) (failure to comply with the recordkeeping requirements of Rule 1:21-6), RPC 5.5(a)(1) (practice of law while suspended) (two instances), and RPC 8.1(b) (failure to cooperate with disciplinary authorities) (four instances); And good cause appearing;
It is ORDERED that Robert James Stack is suspended from the practice of law for a period of two years and until the further Order of the Court, effective October 6, 2023; 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.