Opinion
Docket No. DRB 10-128
06-28-2010
Re: In the Matter of Kimberley S. Tyler
JUUANNE K. DECORE CHIEF COUNSEL ISABEL FRANK DEPUTY CHIEF COUNSEL ELLEN A. BRODSKY FIRST ASSISTANT COUNSEL LILLIAN LEWIN DONA S. SEROTA -TESCHNER COLIN T. TAMS KATHRYN ANNE WINTERLE ASSISTANT COUNSEL
LOUIS PASHMAN, ESQ. CHAIR
BONNIE C. FROST, ESQ. VICE-CHAIR
EDNA Y. BAUGH, ESQ.
BRUCE W. CLARK, ESQ.
JEANNE DOREMUS
HON. REGINALD STANTON
SPENCER V. WISSINGER, III
MORRIS YAMNER, ESQ.
ROBERT C. ZMIRICH JUUANNE K. DECORE
CHIEF COUNSEL ISABEL FRANK
DEPUTY CHIEF COUNSEL ELLEN A. BRODSKY
FIRST ASSISTANT COUNSEL LILLIAN LEWIN
DONA S. SEROTA -TESCHNER
COLIN T. TAMS
KATHRYN ANNE WINTERLE
ASSISTANT COUNSEL RICHARD J. HUGHES JUSTICE COMPLEX Mark Neary, Clerk
Supreme Court of New Jersey
P.O. Box 970
Trenton, New Jersey 08625-0962 District Docket Nos. XII-2009-0030E; XII-2009-0031E; XII-2009-0032E and XII-2009-0034E Dear Mr. Neary:
The Disciplinary Review Board reviewed the motion for discipline by consent (reprimand) filed by the Office of Attorney Ethics ("OAE"), pursuant to R. 1:20-10(b). Following a review of the record, the Board determined to grant the motion. In the Board's view, a reprimand is the appropriate discipline for respondent's conduct.
Specifically, in 2008, in six bankruptcy cases, respondent exhibited gross neglect, lack of diligence and failure to communicate with clients, violations of RPC 1.1(a), RPC 1.3, and RPC 1.4(b). She also engaged in a pattern of neglect, a violation of RPC 1.1(b). In one of the matters, Pittman, respondent communicated directly with the client about a disgorgement order, although respondent knew or should have known that subsequent counsel had already been engaged. In doing so, she violated RPC 4.2.
In mitigation, the Board considered that respondent has had no discipline since her admission to the bar and that she was struggling with diabetes and a mental health issue at the time of the misconduct.
Attorneys found guilty of similar violations have received reprimands. See, e.g., In re Weiss, 173 N.J. 323 (2002) (gross neglect, pattern of neglect, and lack of diligence); In re Balint, 170 N.J. 198 (2001) (in three matters, gross neglect, pattern of neglect, lack of diligence, failure to communicate with clients, and failure to expedite litigation); and In re Bennett, 164 N.J. 340 (2000) (in a number of cases for an insurance company, attorney was found guilty of gross neglect, pattern of neglect, lack of diligence, and failure to communicate with clients).
Enclosed are the following documents:
1. Notice of motion for discipline by consent, dated February 25, 2010.
2. Stipulation of discipline by consent, dated February 25, 2010.
3. Affidavit of consent, dated February 17, 2010.
4. Ethics history, dated June 24, 2010.
Very truly yours,
/s/
Julianne K. DeCore
Chief Counsel JKD/sj
encls.
cc: Louis Pashman, Chair, Disciplinary Review Board
(w/o encls.)
Charles Centinaro, Director, Office of Attorney Ethics
(w/o encls.)
Christina Blunda Kennedy, Deputy Ethics Counsel,
Office of Attorney Ethics (w/o encls.)
Kimberley S. Tyler, Respondent (w/o encls.)
Marie-Ann Greenberg, Tunique Edwards, and Robin Anderson,
Grievants (w/o encls.)