On Friday, March 22, 2024, the Supreme Court of New Jersey issued an order admonishing attorney David S. Rochman for misconduct.
The case is entitled “In the Matter of David S. Rochman,” with case no. 088853.
The order stems from a recommendation by the New Jersey Disciplinary Review Board (DRB), which had reviewed Rochman’s conduct in a lawsuit he filed on behalf of Kareem Smith and Raekesha Moore-Smith relating to a 2016 motor vehicle accident.
In its December 2023 decision, the DRB found that Rochman violated the Rule of Professional Conduct by failing to provide Raekesha with a written fee agreement setting forth the basis for his contingent legal fee. The Board also determined that Rochman violated numerous other ethics rules in his handling of the case.
According to the DRB decision, Rochman met with Kareem and Raekesha, who was Kareem’s wife at the time, in November 2016 to discuss representing Kareem in his personal injury claims. Raekesha was present but not mentioned in the written retainer agreement Rochman had Kareem sign.
In October 2018, Rochman filed a lawsuit on behalf of both Kareem and Raekesha. Raekesha’s claim was for loss of consortium, arising from injuries Kareem sustained in the accident that required her to provide him with care.
By late 2019, Kareem and Raekesha’s marriage had deteriorated and they separated. Concerned that Rochman could no longer fairly represent her interests, Raekesha met with another attorney, Saul Steinberg. Steinberg planned to represent Raekesha for her scheduled deposition in the case on December 16, 2019.
However, according to testimony before the DRB, when Steinberg and Raekesha arrived for the deposition, Rochman became confrontational with Steinberg. Witnesses said Rochman criticized Steinberg over an unrelated past incident and argued Steinberg could not participate without filing a substitution of attorney. Steinberg then left without Raekesha’s deposition being taken.
Over the next several days, communications broke down between Rochman and Raekesha. On December 17, 2019, Raekesha sent Rochman a letter terminating his representation, citing his behavior at the deposition as unprofessional.
The DRB found Rochman violated ethics rules through this conduct. It determined he failed to properly communicate with Raekesha about the scope of his representation, neglected to obtain her fully informed consent, and reacted in an unprofessional manner when she sought independent counsel.
The Board also concluded that Rochman improperly refused to timely relinquish Raekesha’s file after termination. He did not provide the file to her new attorney or file a motion to withdraw from the case for months.
In considering discipline, the DRB reviewed Rochman’s prior 2010 reprimand for related ethical lapses that showed a pattern of failing to diligently communicate with clients. It acknowledged various mitigating factors Rochman presented but found a need for additional discipline beyond an admonition.
However, the New Jersey Supreme Court’s order simply adopted the DRB’s recommendation to admonish Rochman. The order serves to formally caution Rochman and will become part of his record as an attorney licensed in New Jersey. He must also reimburse costs associated with the disciplinary proceedings.
The Disposition states:
“It is ORDERED that David S. Rochman is hereby admonished, and it is further ORDERED that the entire record of this matter be made a permanent part of the respondent’s file as an attorney at law of this State.”
According to avvo.com, Mr. Rochmanis is a personal injury attorney in Voorhees, New Jersey. He attended the Widener University School of Law. He acquired his law license in New Jersey in 1990.
A copy of the original filing can be found here.
