From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

In re Ludwig

Supreme Court of New Jersey.
Apr 25, 2018
233 N.J. 99 (N.J. 2018)

Opinion

D–60 Sept. Term 2016 078656

04-25-2018

In the MATTER OF Thomas LUDWIG, an Attorney at Law (Attorney No. 021511978)


ORDER

The Disciplinary Review Board having filed with the Court its decision in DRB 16–152, concluding that THOMAS LUDWIG of RIDGEWOOD, who was admitted to the bar of this State in 1978, should be reprimanded for violating RPC 1.3 (lack of diligence), RPC 1.4(b) (failure to keep clients reasonably informed about the status of the matter), RPC 8.1(b) (failure to reply to a lawful demand for information from a disciplinary authority);

And the Disciplinary Review Board having further concluded that respondent should be required to conclude the estate matter at issue within ninety days;And good cause appearing;

It is ORDERED that THOMAS LUDWIG is hereby reprimanded; and it is further

ORDERED that THOMAS LUDWIG shall submit proof to the Office of Attorney Ethics within ninety days after the filing date of this Order, by way of a detailed certification, that the estate at issue has been concluded; and it is furtherORDERED 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


Summaries of

In re Ludwig

Supreme Court of New Jersey.
Apr 25, 2018
233 N.J. 99 (N.J. 2018)
Case details for

In re Ludwig

Case Details

Full title:In the MATTER OF Thomas LUDWIG, an Attorney at Law (Attorney No. 021511978)

Court:Supreme Court of New Jersey.

Date published: Apr 25, 2018

Citations

233 N.J. 99 (N.J. 2018)
182 A.3d 948

Citing Cases

In re Trella

the attorney also failed to keep the client reasonably informed about events in the case (RPC 1.4(b)); to…

In re Thomas Ludwig An Attorney at Law

On April 25, 2018, the Court imposed a reprimand on respondent for his mishandling of an estate matter,…