The Ostrich Approach

An attorney with a record of prior discipline has been suspended for an additional three months by the New Jersey Supreme Court.

The Disciplinary Review Board noted

For the past seven years, respondent has demonstrated a consistent trend of accepting the representation of clients, burying her head in the sand, and, ultimately, performing sparse or no legal work. When disciplinary authorities attempt to address her misconduct, respondent typically ignores them. Significantly, this matter represents respondent’s third consecutive default matter before us, within the past year alone, and the third consecutive disciplinary investigation, within the past three years, that she has elected to completely ignore.

On balance, considering respondent’s failure to learn from her past mistakes, her burgeoning disciplinary history, and her continuing penchant for deception, we determine that, had this matter been considered with Lenti II, respondent’s combined misconduct would have warranted at least a six-month suspension. Thus, given respondent’s mishandling of this single client matter, in this default matter, and consistent with applicable disciplinary precedent, we determine that a three-month suspension, consecutive to the three-month suspension imposed in Lenti II, is the appropriate quantum of discipline necessary to protect the public and to preserve confidence in the bar.

Additionally, given respondent’s recurring failure to adhere to professional standards, we reiterate our recommended condition in Lenti II – that, upon reinstatement, respondent be required to practice under the supervision of a proctor for a period of no less than one year.

(Mike Frisch)