imposing three-year suspension on attorney convicted of larceny and conspiracy to commit larceny based on evidence demonstrating that respondent and his wife misappropriated over $9,000 from funds belonging to two adult sisters placed in respondent's home by State Division of Mental Retardation to serve as domestic workers; noting relevance in determining appropriate discipline that respondent had "an unblemished professional career and was highly regarded in the legal and general community"
How later courts described this case
- imposing three-year suspension on attorney convicted of larceny and conspiracy to commit larceny based on evidence demonstrating that respondent and his wife misappropriated over $9,000 from funds belonging to two adult sisters placed in respondent's home by State Division of Mental Retardation to serve as domestic workers; noting relevance in determining appropriate discipline that respondent had "an unblemished professional career and was highly regarded in the legal and general community"
- imposing three-year suspension for conviction of larceny committed on “mentally retarded” members of household
Written by the judges who cited it.
The opinion
O’HERN, J.,
dissenting.
I must respectfully dissent from the Court’s disposition.
I dissented in In re Hughes, 90 N.J. 32 (1982), because I agreed with Justice Schreiber that the mitigating circumstances there far outweighed the extent of the misconduct, and did not call for disbarment. I cannot find sufficient distinction between the cases that would enable me to judge this attorney any more favorably than Hughes was judged.
I share the sympathy of the majority for a lawyer who enjoys great respect in his community and even the affection of one of the victims. Yet we must accept the jury verdict.
I would disbar.
*59 For suspension — Chief Justice WILENTZ and Justices SCHREIBER, HANDLER, POLLOCK and GARIBALDI — 5.
Dissenting — Justice O’HERN — 1.
ORDER
It is ORDERED that VINCENT J. INFINITO of MORRIS-TOWN be suspended from the practice of law for three years, effective January 26,1982, and until further order of this Court; and it is further
ORDERED that respondent reimburse the Administrative Office of the Courts for appropriate administrative costs, including the production of transcripts; and it is further
ORDERED that respondent continue to be restrained and enjoined from the practice of law during the period of his suspension and that he continue to comply with all regulations of the Disciplinary Review Board governing suspended, disbarred or resigned attorneys.