Legal Opinion
R.M. v. Supreme Court of New Jersey
Supreme Court of New Jersey
Decided October 19, 2005PublishedCited by 25 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtJustice Zazzali
In this matter, R.M. challenges the constitutionality of Rule 1:20-9, which mandates that a grievance filed against an attorney remains confidential until a formal complaint is filed. She contends that the rule is an impermissible restraint on free speech because it prevents her from making truthful statements about the ethics process, including the fact that she filed a grievance. R.M. also argues that Rule 1:20-9 unduly suppresses criticism of the system of attorney discipline.
We agree that, as written and as applied, Rule 1:20-9 violates the First Amendment because it is not narrowly…
2Cases cited24 opinions
- New York Times Co. v. SullivanSupreme Court of the United States · 1964
- Pickering v. Board of Ed. of Township High School Dist. 205, Will Cty.Supreme Court of the United States · 1968
- Roth v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1957
- Members of the City Council of Los Angeles v. Taxpayers for VincentSupreme Court of the United States · 1984
- Shelton v. TuckerSupreme Court of the United States · 1960
19 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by25 opinions
- In Re Pl 2001, Chapter 362Supreme Court of New Jersey · 2006
- RM v. Supreme Court of New JerseySupreme Court of New Jersey · 2007
- N.H. v. H.H.New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · 2011
- John J. Robertelli v. New Jersey Office of Attorney Ethics (075584)Supreme Court of New Jersey · 2016
- In Re WarnerSupreme Court of Louisiana · 2009
20 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.