Fifty Seven Years

The New Jersey Supreme Court agreed with its Disciplinary Review Board that dismissal of charges that an attorney failed to set forth a fee agreement with a client was appropriate.

The DRB

Respondent, who has been practicing for fifty-seven years, represented Feman, as a favor to a mutual friend. At oral argument before us, respondent asserted that he had spent fifty to sixty hours on this pro bono matter, that he never intended to charge her a fee, that he successfully negotiated a favorable real estate contract for her, and that he sent the email to her in an attempt to persuade her not to cancel the contract. Under the circumstances, we find no clear and convincing evidence that respondent violated RPC 1.5(b) and determine to dismiss the complaint.

The attorney had been reprimanded and censured in the past.

The 2001 reprimand involved negligent misappropriation ans other misconduct.

The 2006 censure was for “drafting a client’s will that left the entire residuary estate to himself.”

(Mike Frisch)