From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Matter of Yamada

Supreme Court of New Jersey
Oct 5, 1995
664 A.2d 937 (N.J. 1995)

Opinion

October 5, 1995.


ORDER

The Disciplinary Review Board having filed its decision with the Court on August 18, 1995, recommending that as reciprocal discipline for his three-year suspension from practice in New York, SUNAO T.A. YAMADA of JERSEY CITY, who was admitted to the bar of this State in 1982, and who was thereafter temporarily suspended from practice by Order of this Court dated July 13, 1994, and who remains suspended at this time, be suspended from practice for a period of three years retroactive to July 13, 1994;

And the suspension of respondent in New York having been based on respondent's assisting a client in conduct known to be illegal or fraudulent and his representation of clients with differing interests;

And respondent having failed to appear on the return date of the Order to Show Cause in this matter;

And good cause appearing;

It is ORDERED that SUNAO T.A. YAMADA is hereby suspended from the practice of law for a period of three years, the suspension to be retroactive to July 13, 1994; 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 be restrained and enjoined from practicing law during the period of his suspension and that he comply with Rule 1:20-20; and it is further

ORDERED that respondent reimburse the Disciplinary Oversight Committee for appropriate administrative costs incurred in the prosecution of this matter.


Summaries of

Matter of Yamada

Supreme Court of New Jersey
Oct 5, 1995
664 A.2d 937 (N.J. 1995)
Case details for

Matter of Yamada

Case Details

Full title:IN THE MATTER OF SUNAO T.A. YAMADA, AN ATTORNEY AT LAW

Court:Supreme Court of New Jersey

Date published: Oct 5, 1995

Citations

664 A.2d 937 (N.J. 1995)
664 A.2d 937

Citing Cases

In re Saluti

d the request; the attorney later denied his conduct to a third judge, only to admit to this judge one week…

In re Malvone

ed the request; the attorney later denied his conduct to a third judge, only to admit to this judge one week…