Investigative files relating to lawyer discipline are protected by New Jersey court rule, and the court's interest in confidentiality outweighs the common-law right of public access, a New Jersey court has ruled. The court found that such files are privileged, and the plaintiff had not shown any particularized need to defeat that privilege. The plaintiff, the head of a public interest group that monitors attorney discipline, had sought access to a state agency file on a solo who was disbarred by consent.
October 05, 2007 at 12:00 AM
1 minute read
The original version of this story was published on Law.Com
Investigative files relating to lawyer discipline are protected by court rule, and the court’s interest in confidentiality outweighs the common-law right of public access, a New Jersey judge has ruled.
“In essence, the rule-making authority of the court preempts a common law balancing test,” Mercer County Assignment Judge Linda Feinberg held on Sept. 28 in Paff v. Director, Office of Attorney Ethics, MER-L-968-07.
Presented by BigVoodoo
Law firms & in-house legal departments with a presence in the middle east celebrate outstanding achievement within the profession.
The premier educational and networking event for employee benefits brokers and agents.
The Legal Intelligencer honors lawyers leaving a mark on the legal community in Pennsylvania and Delaware.
A large and well-established Tampa company is seeking a contracts administrator to support the company's in-house attorney and manage a wide...
We are seeking an attorney to join our commercial finance practice in either our Stamford, Hartford or New Haven offices. Candidates should ...
We are seeking an attorney to join our corporate and transactional practice. Candidates should have a minimum of 8 years of general corporat...
MELICK & PORTER, LLP PROMOTES CONNECTICUT PARTNERS HOLLY ROGERS, STEVEN BANKS, and ALEXANDER AHRENS
