Legal Opinion

Matter of Konopka

Supreme Court of New Jersey

Decided October 4, 1991PublishedCited by 26 opinions

1Per curiam

This attorney-disciplinary proceeding arose from a random audit of the trust funds of respondent, Michael A. Konopka. As a result of the audit, the Office of Attorney Ethics (OAE) filed a complaint against respondent charging him with misappropriation of clients’ funds, as well as failure to maintain required records and failure to safeguard clients’ funds. More specifically, a formal six-count ethics complaint filed in January 1988 against respondent charged him with violations of the Rules of Professional Conduct, namely, the failure to maintain trust-account records, commingling personal…

2Cases cited19 opinions

  1. In Re WilsonSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1979
  2. Matter of AddamsDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1990
  3. State Ex Rel. Oklahoma Bar Ass'n v. RaskinSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1982
  4. In re MarksAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1980
  5. In Re JacobSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1984

14 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by26 opinions

  1. Baxt v. LiloiaSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1998
  2. Lawyer Disciplinary Board v. KupecWest Virginia Supreme Court · 1998
  3. Matter of GreenbergSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1998
  4. In the Matter of Dennis M. Barlow, an Attorney-At-LawSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1995
  5. Matter of RothSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1995

21 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API