Cherry Hill attorney censured by the Supreme Court of New Jersey over case of Dishonesty and Fraud

On December 20, 2022, the Supreme Court of New Jersey censured Cherry Hill attorney David S. Bradley over a case of dishonesty and fraud. 

The Case is entitled “In the matter of David S. Bradley” with Case no. 086979.

The charges cited Rules of Professional Conduct 3.3(a)(5), 8.4(c), 8.4(d) which state:

Failure to disclose to a tribunal a material fact, knowing the omissions reasonably certain to mislead the tribunal.

Conduct involving dishonesty, fraud, deceit, or misrepresentation.

Conduct prejudicial to the administration of justice.

The Rules of Professional Conduct can be found here. 

In 2017, a client retained the respondent to defend him in two (2) separate incidents of driving while intoxicated. One in Stratford Borough and the second in Berlin Borough. The client through the respondent entered a guilty plea as the first offender in Berlin. Thereafter, the client was sentenced as the first offender sanctioned with the appropriate minimal implications. On the same date, the respondent and client appeared in the Stratford municipal court on which they entered a guilty plea to DWI based on the prosecutor’s recommendation that the court sentence Coyle as a first offender. Coyle’s driver’s abstract had not yet been updated to reflect his Berlin DWI conviction from that same morning and, thus, neither the Stratford municipal court nor the prosecutor was aware of Coyle’s prior conviction. Naturally, the court only imposed minimum penalties to the client of the respondent. Although the latter knew that the abstract has not yet been updated, he never came forward to correct the misrepresentation.

The filing states:

“Following his appearance in the Stratford municipal court, respondent discussed with Coyle the fact that, despite the fact that he was twice sentenced as a first offender, the Motor Vehicle Commission (MVC) may, nevertheless, treat Coyle as if he had been sentenced as a second offender and impose a license suspension greater than that imposed by the Stratford municipal court. See N.J.S.A. 39:5-30 (vesting the MVC director with the authority to suspend or revoke driving privileges for any motor vehicle offense after written notice). Respondent also explained to Coyle that, if he received an additional DWI conviction, he would be treated as a third offender. Further, at some point earlier in the representation, the respondent had discussed with Coyle the penalties he faced as both a first and second – time DWI offender, as well as the enhanced penalties he could face for subsequent DWI convictions.”

The filing continues:

“At the ethics hearing, in his answer to the formal ethics complaint, and at oral argument before us, respondent claimed that he was unaware, at the time of Coyle’s court appearances, that his tactic was unethical. Specifically, the respondent believed that he had no responsibility to provide the Stratford municipal court or prosecutor with information detrimental to Coyle, even when it would impact a mandatory sentence. Respondent also expressed his unsupported belief that not only was the municipal court required to solely rely on Coyle’s driver’s abstract, regardless of his independent knowledge of Coyle’s prior conviction but also that the municipal court should have instead questioned the prosecutor regarding Coyle’s offense history. Incredibly, the respondent also rationalized that he would have been found “ineffective” for disclosing Coyle’s prior conviction from that same morning.

According to the court, they are satisfied with the DEC’s findings that the respondent’s conduct was unethical and is fully supported by clear and convincing evidence. Therefore, the respondent should be censured.

The Disposition states:

“It is ORDERED that David S. Bradley is hereby censured, 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, and it is further ORDERED that respondent reimburse the Disciplinary Oversight”

As of today, Mr. Bradley is listed on the website of the law firm Law Office of David Bradley, LLC as a practicing attorney. His info can be found on martindale.com. He attended Temple University, graduating in 2002. Bradley practices in Cherry Hill, New Jersey. He is licensed in New Jersey.

A copy of the original filing can be found here.