Legal Opinion

In Re Pajerowski

Supreme Court of New Jersey

Decided December 4, 1998PublishedCited by 6 opinions

1Per curiam

This matter arises from a recommendation for discipline filed by the Committee on Attorney Advertising (“CAA”) against respondent, Patrick M. Pajerowski. Respondent and the CAA executed a Stipulation of Facts and Discipline in which respondent admitted that he had violated the following Rules of Professional Conduct: RPC 1.2(a) (failing to abide by client’s decision); RPC 1.3 (failing to act with diligence); RPC 1.4(a) (failing to communicate); RPC 1.7(a), RPC 1.7(b), and RPC 1.7(c) (representing clients with conflicts of interest); RPC 1.8(e) (providing financial assistance to client); RPC…

2Cases cited12 opinions

  1. Ohralik v. Ohio State Bar Assn.Supreme Court of the United States · 1978
  2. In Re VerdiramoSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1984
  3. Matter of ConwaySupreme Court of New Jersey · 1987
  4. Chreste v. CommonwealthCourt of Appeals of Kentucky · 1916
  5. Matter of EdsonSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1987

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

3Cited by6 opinions

  1. In Re BreslinSupreme Court of New Jersey · 2002
  2. Pietsch v. Minnesota Board of Chiropractic ExaminersCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 2003
  3. In Re BreslinSupreme Court of New Jersey · 2002
  4. In Re Opinion No. 735 of the Supreme Court Advisory Committee on Professional EthicsSupreme Court of New Jersey · 2025
  5. In Re RivaSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1999

1 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