Proof Problems Leads To Censure

The New Jersey Supreme court has imposed a censure based on the recommendation of the  Disciplinary Review Board.

The Board noted concerns

On its review of this motion, the Board considered that respondent  was unable to locate needed records; that some of the witnesses  had provided inconsistent statements, thereby creating  issues of credibility; and that one of the key witnesses could no longer be located. In addition, and specifically cited in the stipulation  that the parties executed, although the OAE was aware that respondent’s handling of the case was highly suspect and that he may have knowingly misappropriated client funds, it could not prove, by clear and convincing evidence, that he did so. In the context of these proof problems, the Board determined to grant the OAE’s motion.

The attorney had advanced funds and paid creditors in an estate matter.

He also engaged inrecordkeeping violations

As a result of respondent’s deficient records, he was unable to substantiate the total amount of advances he had made against the proceeds of the lawsuit. He, thus, admitted that, because he had failed to maintain adequate records of the advanced funds, he negligently misappropriated a portion of them by failing to distribute the correct amount to Webb’s heirs, a violation of RPC 1.15.

(Mike Frisch)