You are viewing a free summary from Descrybe.ai. For citation checking, legal issue analysis, and other advanced tools, explore our Legal Research Toolkit — not free, but close.

In re Shin

Citations: 224 N.J. 455; 134 A.3d 444; 2016 N.J. LEXIS 481

Court: Supreme Court of New Jersey; May 5, 2016; New Jersey; State Supreme Court

Narrative Opinion Summary

Eungnam Peter Shin, admitted to the New Jersey bar in 1998 and residing in Flushing, New York, is reprimanded based on reciprocal discipline under Rule 1:20-14. The Disciplinary Review Board found that Shin's conduct violated several Rules of Professional Conduct (RPC) in New Jersey: RPC 3.3(a)(1) for making a false statement to a tribunal, RPC 8.4(c) for conduct involving dishonesty, fraud, deceit, or misrepresentation, and RPC 8.4(d) for conduct prejudicial to the administration of justice. The order mandates that the entire record of this case be permanently included in Shin's attorney file. Additionally, Shin is required to reimburse the Disciplinary Oversight Committee for reasonable administrative costs and expenses related to the prosecution of this matter, as outlined in Rule 1:20-17.

Legal Issues Addressed

Conduct Involving Dishonesty, Fraud, Deceit, or Misrepresentation - RPC 8.4(c)

Application: The attorney engaged in conduct that involved dishonesty, fraud, deceit, or misrepresentation, resulting in disciplinary measures.

Reasoning: ...violated several Rules of Professional Conduct (RPC) in New Jersey:...RPC 8.4(c) for conduct involving dishonesty, fraud, deceit, or misrepresentation...

Conduct Prejudicial to the Administration of Justice - RPC 8.4(d)

Application: The attorney's actions were deemed prejudicial to the administration of justice, contributing to the disciplinary reprimand.

Reasoning: ...violated several Rules of Professional Conduct (RPC) in New Jersey:...RPC 8.4(d) for conduct prejudicial to the administration of justice.

False Statement to a Tribunal - RPC 3.3(a)(1)

Application: The attorney was found to have violated the rule by making a false statement to a tribunal, warranting disciplinary action.

Reasoning: The Disciplinary Review Board found that Shin's conduct violated several Rules of Professional Conduct (RPC) in New Jersey: RPC 3.3(a)(1) for making a false statement to a tribunal...

Permanent Record Inclusion of Disciplinary Actions

Application: The order requires that the entire record of the disciplinary case be permanently included in the attorney's file.

Reasoning: The order mandates that the entire record of this case be permanently included in Shin's attorney file.

Reciprocal Discipline under Rule 1:20-14

Application: The case involves imposing reciprocal discipline on an attorney based on findings from a different jurisdiction.

Reasoning: Eungnam Peter Shin...is reprimanded based on reciprocal discipline under Rule 1:20-14.

Reimbursement of Administrative Costs - Rule 1:20-17

Application: The attorney is required to reimburse the Disciplinary Oversight Committee for reasonable costs and expenses incurred during the prosecution.

Reasoning: Additionally, Shin is required to reimburse the Disciplinary Oversight Committee for reasonable administrative costs and expenses related to the prosecution of this matter, as outlined in Rule 1:20-17.