Opinion
D-26 September Term 2020 085103
06-17-2021
IN the MATTER OF Christopher Roy HIGGINS, An Attorney At Law (Attorney No. 041532012)
ORDER
The Disciplinary Review Board having filed with the Court its decision in DRB 19-456, concluding that Christopher Roy Higgins, formerly of Parlin, who was admitted to the bar of this State in 2012, should be suspended from the practice of law for a period of three months for violating RPC 1.1 (a) (gross neglect), RPC 1.3 (lack of diligence), RPC 1.5 (b) (failure to set forth in writing the basis or rate of the fee), RPC 1.15 (a) (commingling of funds), RPC 1.15 (d) and Rule 1:21-6 (recordkeeping violations), RPC 1.16 (c) (failure to comply with applicable law requiring notice to or permission of a tribunal when terminating a representation), RPC 1.16 (d) (failure to protect client's interests on termination of the representation), RPC 3.2 (failure to expedite litigation), RPC 3.4 (c) (failure to obey the obligation of a tribunal), RPC 8.1 (b) (failure to cooperate with ethics authorities), and RPC 8.4 (d) (conduct prejudicial to the administration of justice);
And the Court having determined from its review of the matter that the period of suspension should be concurrent with the three-month term of suspension ordered in D-172-18 (083359) (DRB 19-040) and that prior to reinstatement to practice, respondent should provide proof of his fitness to practice law;
And good cause appearing;
It is ORDERED that Christopher Roy Higgins is suspended from the practice of law for a period of three months, effective July 15, 2021, and until the further Order of the Court; and it is further
ORDERED that prior to reinstatement to practice, respondent shall provide proof of his fitness to practice law as attested to by a mental health professional approved by the Office of Attorney Ethics; 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.