From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

In re Morton

Supreme Court of New Jersey.
Nov 1, 2017
231 N.J. 130 (N.J. 2017)

Opinion

D–12 September Term 2017 080073

11-01-2017

In the MATTER OF Benjamin MORTON, an Attorney At Law (Attorney No. 050681998)


ORDER

This matter having been duly presented pursuant to Rule 1:20–10(b)(1), following a granting of a motion for discipline by consent in DRB 17–229 of BENJAMIN MORTON of NEWARK, who was admitted to the bar of this State in 1998;

And the Office of Attorney Ethics and respondent having signed a stipulation of discipline by consent in which it was agreed that respondent violated RPC 1.15(d) (failure to comply with the recordkeeping requirements of Rule 1:21–6);

And the parties having agreed that respondent's conduct violated RPC 1.15(d) (failure to comply with the recordkeeping requirements of Rule 1:21–6), and that said conduct warrants a censure or such lesser discipline as the Board may deem appropriate;

And the Disciplinary Review Board having determined that a reprimand is the appropriate discipline for respondent's unethical conduct and having granted the motion for discipline by consent in VA–2016–0004E and good cause appearing;

It is ORDERED that BENJAMIN MORTON is hereby reprimanded; 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

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.


Summaries of

In re Morton

Supreme Court of New Jersey.
Nov 1, 2017
231 N.J. 130 (N.J. 2017)
Case details for

In re Morton

Case Details

Full title:In the MATTER OF Benjamin MORTON, an Attorney At Law (Attorney No…

Court:Supreme Court of New Jersey.

Date published: Nov 1, 2017

Citations

231 N.J. 130 (N.J. 2017)
172 A.3d 545

Citing Cases

In re Wittenberg

Second, the Board has imposed discipline ranging from an admonition to a censure solely for recordkeeping…

In re Morton

On November 1, 2017, the Court imposed a reprimand on respondent for his stipulated violation of RPC 1.15(d).…