The New Jersey Supreme Court recently amended the rules governing attorney discipline, creating a more structured process for attorneys to apply for readmission after disbarment and reinstatement after suspension. To do this, the Court created an Attorney Regulatory Board (ARB). The ARB functions as a post-disciplinary tribunal and will review attorneys’ petitions for reinstatement from suspension and petitions for readmission from disbarment. Here’s what you should know.
How Are the New Jersey Court Rules Changing?
New Jersey was among the handful of states that made disbarment for misappropriation of client funds permanent.
That has now changed. The New Jersey Supreme Court, based in Trenton, adopted amendments to two rules: 1:20-1 et seq., which governs attorney regulation and discipline, and 1:20B-4, which governs the Disciplinary Oversight Committee. The Court also adopted new Rule 1:20-15B, which creates the ARB.
The new rule says that the ARB will have six members. Four of those will be attorneys, and two will be members of the public. The current role of the Office of Board Counsel will also be expanded to serve as counsel to the ARB in addition to continuing to serve as counsel to the Disciplinary Review Board (DRB). As part of the New Jersey Supreme Court’s attorney regulatory process, the ARB will review petitions for readmission after disbarment and make recommendations to the Supreme Court.
Changes went into effect on March 1, 2026.
The Wilson Rule
There are several reasons that lawyers in can be disbarred. Some of the most common are misappropriation of client funds, but attorneys can also lose their licenses for other reasons — crimes involving dishonesty or other types of moral turpitude, fraud in bar admissions, and even failure to comply with ethics violations.
For decades, disbarment was presumed permanent in New Jersey. Once a lawyer lost their license, they could almost never get it back, especially if the disbarment involved a client’s property. This stemmed from a 1979 case called In Re Wilson, known as “the Wilson Rule.” Basically, if an attorney wrongly took a client’s money, including money in an escrow account, they could never be a lawyer again.
The reasoning was that this was necessary to protect clients and the public’s trust in the practice of law. For the legal profession to be respected, it must be tightly regulated and its lawyers strongly disciplined.
But things changed in 2022 when the New Jersey Supreme Court made a major change. In the Matter of Dionne Larrel Wade: a lawyer misappropriated client funds, but she admitted it right away and, by other accounts, was a strong advocate for her clients. Some of her clients even argued against her disbarment. The case prompted the court to reconsider whether the Wilson Rule was truly fair. Maybe, the justices thought, permanent disbarment wasn’t necessary in every single case with no exceptions.
The court also noted that only eight states, including New Jersey, make disbarment permanent; most states, along with the District of Columbia, permit some form of readmission after a set period. Of course, there are many shades of disbarment, from mandatory permanent, to discretionary permanent, to de facto permanent. Still, even the American Bar Association Model Rule 25 allows disbarred attorneys to apply for readmission after five years.
How It Works
After Wade, New Jersey implemented a process for disbarred lawyers, allowing them to seek permission to regain their licenses after a five-year waiting period if they’d satisfied a series of requirements proving they now have the competency, integrity, and character to practice law in New Jersey. The process includes:
- Filing an application for reinstatement
- Paying fees and financial sanctions, including all funds due to the New Jersey Lawyers’ Fund for Client Protection
- Completing a series of continuing legal education courses about ethical practice and proper law firm management
- Other restrictions, as necessary, including a referral to the Committee on Character or limits on a lawyer’s ability to handle client funds in the future
The Programs and Boards that Ensure Compliance in New Jersey
The New Jersey Supreme Court is responsible for ensuring that all attorneys in the state follow ethical and practice-of-law rules and serve their clients' best interests. The court has put several programs and boards in place to ensure compliance:
- The Office of Attorney Ethics (OAE). The OAE investigates and prosecutes claims of attorney misconduct in New Jersey. It supervises and disciplines attorneys.
- The Disciplinary Review Board of the Supreme Court (DRB). The DRB reviews recommendations for discipline and makes its own findings in each case. Before the creation of the ARB, petitions for reinstatement from suspension had been reviewed by the DRB.
- The Attorney Regulatory Board (ARB). The new ARB is a new part of the New Jersey Supreme Court’s attorney regulatory process and reviews all petitions for readmission after disbarment. It then makes a recommendation to the New Jersey Supreme Court.
- The New Jersey Lawyers’ Fund for Client Protection. This fund reimburses clients who suffered losses due to attorney misconduct in New Jersey.
Generally, New Jersey has established a robust and fair review process that gives attorneys a second chance. The most recent change, which builds on the work of a special committee to create the ARB, continues to refine this process. It should make it clearer for attorneys, for the public, and for the protection of the practice of law.
Related Resources
- New Ethics Guidance on When Judges Can (and Can’t) Publicly Defend the Rule of Law (FindLaw's Practice of Law)
- When the Social Media Lawyer’s Own Selfie Backfired (FindLaw's Practice of Law)
- Trump DOJ Tries to Seize Control of State Bar Ethics Investigations (FindLaw's Practice of Law)
