Opinion
Docket No. DRB 14-128 District Docket No. XIV-2013-0090E
07-23-2014
Re: In the Matter of Cheryl H. Picker
BONNIE C. FROST, ESQ., CHAIR EDNA Y. BAUGH, ESQ., VICE-CHAIR BRUCE W. CLARK, ESQ. HON. MAURICE J. GALLIPOLI THOMAS J. HOBERMAN EILEEN RIVERA ANNE C. SINGER, ESQ. MORRIS YAMNER, ESQ. ROBERTO. ZMIRICH ELLEN A. BRODSKY CHIEF COUNSEL ISABEL FRANK DEPUTY CHIEF COUNSEL LILLIAN LEWIN BARRY R. PETERSEN JR. COLIN T. TAMS KATHRYN ANNE WINTERLE ASSISTANT COUNSEL
BONNIE C. FROST, ESQ., CHAIR
EDNA Y. BAUGH, ESQ., VICE-CHAIR
BRUCE W. CLARK, ESQ.
HON. MAURICE J. GALLIPOLI
THOMAS J. HOBERMAN
EILEEN RIVERA
ANNE C. SINGER, ESQ.
MORRIS YAMNER, ESQ.
ROBERTO. ZMIRICH
ELLEN A. BRODSKY
CHIEF COUNSEL
ISABEL FRANK
DEPUTY CHIEF COUNSEL
LILLIAN LEWIN
BARRY R. PETERSEN JR.
COLIN T. TAMS
KATHRYN ANNE WINTERLE
ASSISTANT COUNSEL
RICHARD J. HUGHES JUSTICE COMPLEX
Mark Neary, Clerk
Supreme Court of New Jersey
P.O. Box 970
Trenton, New Jersey 08625-0962
Dear Mr. Neary:
The Disciplinary Review Board reviewed the motion for discipline by consent (reprimand) filed by the Office of Attorney Ethics (OAE) pursuant to R. 1:20-10(b). Following a review of the record, the Board determined to grant the motion. In the Board's view, a reprimand is the appropriate discipline for respondent's violations of RPC 1.15(a) (deposit of personal funds in the trust account) and RPC 8.1(b) (failure to cooperate with disciplinary authorities.
Specifically, on February 15, 2013, respondent had a $240 overdraft in her trust account (allegedly caused by a bank error). Subsequently, the OAE scheduled a demand audit of respondent's attorney records. Respondent neither provided the OAE with documents requested in connection with the overdraft nor appeared at the audit.
The audit revealed that respondent had improperly used her trust account to pay for personal expenses. No trust funds were in the account at that time. Respondent explained that health problems prevented her from attending the audit and that she did not submit the records to the OAE because they were in storage at the time. Respondent stipulated that she cannot apply for reinstatement until she turns over the requested records to the OAE.
The Board noted that a prior Court order requires respondent to submit proof of fitness to practice law, at the time of reinstatement.
Attorneys guilty of similar conduct generally receive reprimands. See, e.g., In re Bronson, 204 N.J. 76 (2010) (attorney overdrew his trust account eight times over a seven-month period but maintained only personal funds in the trust account; the attorney also failed to cooperate with the OAE's investigation; the attorney stipulated to violating RPC 1.15(a) and (d) and RPC 8.1(b); ethics history included two reprimands and a temporary suspension); In re Orth, 195 N.J. 3 (2008) (default matter; attorney commingled personal and client funds in the trust account and failed to cooperate with disciplinary authorities; the attorney paid personal expenses with trust account checks; he also failed to promptly deliver funds to a third party); In re Kessler, 178 N.J. 71 (2003) (among other things, attorney commingled funds in the trust account by failing to promptly withdraw earned legal fees and failed to cooperate with ethics authorities; prior private reprimand and reprimand); and In re Duke, 174 N.J. 371 (2002) (attorney guilty of commingling trust and personal funds, failing to cooperate with disciplinary authorities, and negligently misappropriating trust funds).
In determining that a reprimand was adequate discipline for respondent's infractions, the Board was aware that she has received a three-month suspension and that she has been temporarily suspended. The Board noted, however, that the conduct that gave rise to those matters was unrelated to the conduct at hand.
Enclosed are the following documents:
1. Notice of motion for discipline by consent, dated May 1, 2014.
2. Stipulation of discipline by consent, dated May 1, 2014.
3. Undated affidavit of consent.
4. Ethics history, dated July 23, 2014.
Very truly yours,
/s/
Ellen A. Brodsky
Chief Counsel
/tk Encls. c: (w/o enclosures)
Bonnie C. Frost, Chair, Disciplinary Review Board (via email)
Charles Centinaro, Director, Office of Attorney Ethics
Christina Blunda Kennedy, Office of Attorney Ethics,
Deputy Ethics Counsel
Scott B. Piekarsky, Esq., Respondent Counsel
D-140 September Term 2013
074645
IN THE MATTER OF CHERYL H. PICKER, AN ATTORNEY AT LAW (Attorney No. 028791988)
ORDER
This matter have been duly presented to the Court pursuant to Rule 1:20-10(b), following the granting of a motion for discipline by consent in DRB 14-128 of CHERYL H. PICKER, formerly of SOUTH ORANGE, who was admitted to the bar of this State in 1988, and who has been suspended from the practice of law since April 25, 2013;
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(a)(failure to hold funds separate from the lawyer's own property), and RPC 8.1(b) (failure to cooperate with disciplinary authorities);
And the parties having agreed that respondent's conduct violated RPC 1.15(a) and RPC 8.1(b), and that said conduct warrants a reprimanded or lesser discipline;
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 District Docket No. XIV-2013-0090E;
And the Office of Attorney Ethics and respondent having agreed that respondent should be required to produce to the Office of Attorney Ethics the requested books and records required by Rule 1:21-6 prior to her application to be reinstated to the practice of law;
And the Disciplinary Review Board having submitted the record of the proceedings to the Clerk of the Supreme Court for the entry of an order of discipline in accordance with Rule 1:20-16(e);
And good cause appearing;
It is ORDERED that CHERYL H. PICKER, formerly of SOUTH ORANGE is hereby reprimanded; and it is further
ORDERED that prior to any application for reinstatement to practice, respondent shall provide to the Office of Attorney Ethics the requested books and records of her attorney accounts required by Rule 1:21-6; and it is further
ORDERED that respondent continue to be restrained and enjoined from practicing law during the period of her suspension; and it is further
ORDERED that respondent continue to comply with Rule 1:20-20 dealing with suspended attorneys; and it is further
ORDERED that respondent continue to comply with the requests of the Office of Attorney Ethics to produce her attorney account books and records as provided in Rule 1:21-6; 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 privided in Rule 1:20-17.
WITNESS, the Honorable Stuart Rabner, Chief Justice, at Trenton, this 28th day of July, 2014.
/s/
CLERK OF THE SUPREME COURT