Decisions of the New Jersey Supreme Court
Disciplinary Review Board
This is a full-text archive of the decisions of the New Jersey Supreme Court's Disciplinary Review Board. This board acts on behalf of the court in hearing and adjudicating allegations of attorney misconduct in the State of New Jersey.
The collection is currently updated regularly, as new decisions are released to us by the DRB. The collection has decisions from 1988 to date. The DRB is currently working on its archive, and we are adding the newly scanned material as they scan it.
For other New Jersey courts and resources, click here.
Resources:
Recent Decisions | Search the text of the collection | Locate a decision by docket number | Search by date of decision | Search by party name | Notes for users |
Submit Comments | Help for Searching |
SEARCH THE N.J. DISCIPLINARY REVIEW BOARD DECISIONS
Please type a query in the search dialog. You may use compound searches using and and or (Note: do not use the & symbol for and). See Help for Searching for more information.
FIND A DOCUMENT BY DOCKET NUMBER
In order to find a document by its docket number, enter the docket number in the
boxes
provided, and click "Submit." The first box should be given a two digit
number, and three digits in the second box.
For example, an acceptable docket number would look something like this: 06-263.
Finally, at this time, the only docket numbers we have available are the Disciplinary
Review Board docket numbers, and not the Supreme Court docket numbers. A docket number
that looks like this 'D-123-05' is the kind used by the Supreme Court for its
final orders, and will not work in our system at this time.
SEARCH FOR CASES BY DATE
SEARCH FOR CASES BY PARTY NAME
To find cases by the names of the parties involved, First select the courts that you wish to search. Then enter names in the appropriate boxes. It does not matter which box gets the plaintiff and which gets the defendant. Enter as much or as little as you want of the name.(Important hints) Typing both a plaintiff and defendant in only one box will almost guarantee failure. Finally, the party names that we save are generally limited to the first name that appears in the caption. For example: "William Smith and Thomas Jones v. John Cusak and William Thornton" is saved in the system as "William Smith v. William Thornton".
NOTES FOR USERS: These cases are made available by an agreement between the New Jersey Supreme Court and Rutgers University School of Law. No changes of any kind are made by Rutgers aside from the conversion from the original wordprocessor format to HTML. All opinions are available in their original word processed format by clicking the hypertext link at the top of each document. Any Questions and comments about this service are welcome. The staff communicates by e-mail, and can be reached here: Email Webmaster . We try to respond to all inquiries the same day. Before writing with a problem, however, please read our help pages. Also, please keep in mind that we are not lawyers and cannot give legal advice. |