Legal Opinion

In re Musto

Supreme Court of New Jersey

Decided December 19, 1997PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Per curiam

This attorney disciplinary proceeding arises from a motion for final discipline, based upon a criminal conviction, filed by the Office of Attorney Ethics (OAE) before the Disciplinary Review Board (DRB) pursuant to Rule l:20-13(c). The DRB concurred in the OAE recommendation that Victor M. Musto (respondent) be disbarred from the practice of law. The motion was based on *168respondent’s guilty pleas in federal and state courts to conspiracy to distribute cocaine; possession of methyl ecgonine, a metabolite of cocaine; conspiracy to possess heroin and cocaine; and possession of heroin and cocaine.…

2Cases cited31 opinions

  1. In Re JacobSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1984
  2. Matter of GoldbergSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1987
  3. Matter of HeinSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1986
  4. In Re FranklinSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1976
  5. Matter of LitwinSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1986

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

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. In the Matter of Mark G. Legato (077464), In the Matter of Regan C. Kenyon, Jr. (077465), In the Matter of Alexander D. Walter (077467), Attorneys at LawSupreme Court of New Jersey · 2017
  2. In the Matter of Mark G. Legato (077464), In the Matter of Regan C. Kenyon, Jr. (077465), In the Matter of Alexander D. Walter (077467), Attorneys at LawSupreme Court of New Jersey · 2017

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

Powered by the Exa API