On Wednesday, June 11, 2025, the Supreme Court of New Jersey censured attorney Jonathan W. Chase for unethical conduct stemming from a 2023 Pennsylvania disciplinary case. Chase faced reciprocal discipline after a one-year suspension by the Pennsylvania Supreme Court for violations related to his handling of a client’s case.
The case is entitled “In the Matter of Jonathan W. Chase,” with case no. 090516.
The charges cited New Jersey Rules of Professional Conduct 1.2(a), 1.4(b), 1.4(c), 3.3(a)(1), 4.1(a)(1), 8.4(c), and 8.4(d).
The New Jersey Disciplinary Review Board (DRB), in its March 28, 2025, decision, recommended the censure based on Chase’s actions in a lawsuit filed on behalf of client Keith Regan against Temple University. The case, initiated in 2019 in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania, alleged violations of the Americans with Disabilities Act. Chase, then employed by Kraemer, Manes & Associates LLC, was assigned to represent Regan under a contingent fee agreement.
In March 2020, Chase informed Regan that he was leaving the firm to start his practice and would continue to represent him. However, he failed to advise Regan of his right to choose other counsel or discuss factors for selecting new representation. Chase also did not secure a new written fee agreement, assuming the prior terms remained in effect.
The DRB found that Chase neglected to pursue additional discovery, such as depositions, claiming it was a strategic choice to avoid unnecessary costs. In February 2021, Temple University filed a motion for summary judgment. Without Regan’s knowledge or consent, Chase executed a Joint Stipulation and Order for Dismissal with Prejudice on March 2, 2021, leading to the case’s dismissal by the court the same day. Chase later stated he acted to protect Regan from potential legal fees if the motion was granted, but he did not discuss this decision with his client.
For six months following the dismissal, Chase misled Regan, falsely claiming the case was ongoing and that he was seeking extensions to oppose the summary judgment motion. Regan, unaware of the dismissal, continued to provide input and inquire about case progress. In September 2021, after independently discovering the dismissal, Regan confronted Chase, who apologized and offered free legal advice as compensation.
Regan retained new counsel, who successfully vacated the dismissal in December 2021. However, the court later granted Temple’s summary judgment motion, dismissing the case. The Pennsylvania disciplinary authorities, in a May 15, 2023 order, suspended Chase for one year after he admitted to the misconduct in a joint petition with the Office of Disciplinary Counsel.
The New Jersey DRB determined Chase violated several Rules of Professional Conduct, including failing to abide by a client’s decisions, neglecting to keep a client informed, making false statements to a court and third parties, and engaging in conduct involving dishonesty and prejudice to the administration of justice. The board dismissed charges of gross neglect and lack of diligence, citing insufficient evidence.
In mitigation, Chase had no prior disciplinary history in New Jersey or Pennsylvania, cooperated with authorities, and expressed remorse. The DRB concluded that a censure, less severe than Pennsylvania’s suspension, was appropriate based on New Jersey precedent.
The Supreme Court adopted the recommendation, ordering Chase to reimburse the Disciplinary Oversight Committee for administrative costs and expenses incurred in the matter.
According to Avvo.com, Mr. Chase is an employment and labor attorney in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. He attended the Widener University School of Law, graduating in 2011. He acquired his law license in New Jersey in 2012.
A copy of the original filing can be found here.
