Sorry, you need to enable JavaScript to visit this website.

Notice – Defaults Scheduled for Review by the Disciplinary Review Board on Thursday, March 19, 2026

The following matters have been certified to the Disciplinary Review Board as defaults, in accordance with R. 1:20-4(f):

In the Matter of Paul S. Foreman
    Docket No. DRB 25-319
    District Docket Nos. VC-2025-0904E and XIV-2024-0345E
    
In the Matter of Jay Lowell Juckett
    Docket No. DRB 25-320
    District Docket No. XIV-2024-0573E

In the Matter of Marc Seguinot
    Docket No. DRB 26-002
    District Docket No. I-2025-0005E

In the Matter of Darryl George Smith
    Docket No. DRB 26-011
    District Docket No. IIB-2025-0001E

In the Matter of Joseph Peter Howard
    Docket No. DRB 26-015
    District Docket No. IV-2025-0019E

In the Matter of Mary Elizabeth Lenti
    Docket No. DRB 26-016
    District Docket No. XIV-2024-0409E

These matters are scheduled to be reviewed by the Board on Thursday, March 19, 2026. R. 1:20-4(f) provides that an attorney-respondent’s failure to timely file a conforming answer “shall be deemed an admission that the allegations of the complaint are true and . . . provide sufficient basis for the imposition of discipline.” Although chances for a successful motion are limited, a motion to vacate the default may be filed with the Board by no later than February 17, 2026. MOTIONS RECEIVED AFTER THE DEADLINE WILL NOT BE REVIEWED BY THE BOARD. The motion should (1) specify why the attorney-respondent failed to file a timely, conforming answer (including lack of notice), and (2) set forth any claimed meritorious defenses to the ethics charges. The motion also must be simultaneously served on the Director of the Office of Attorney Ethics and, where appropriate, the district ethics committee responsible for the underlying ethics matter. A certification regarding that service must accompany any documents filed with the Board.

Respondent is hereby advised that, generally, in a default matter, the discipline is enhanced to reflect a respondent’s failure to cooperate with disciplinary authorities as an aggravating factor. In re Kivler, 193 N.J. 332, 338 (2008).
 

Document Date: Feb. 5, 2026

Publish Date: Feb. 5, 2026