On Friday, December 8, 2023, the Supreme Court of New Jersey issued an order censuring attorney William P. Munday for violating multiple ethics rules in a 2015 zoning case.

The case is entitled “In the Matter of William P. Munday,” with case no. 088063.

The charges cited New Jersey Rules of Professional Conduct 3.1, 3.3(a)(1), and 8.4(a)(c)(d) which states:

Engaging in frivolous litigation.

Making a false statement of material fact to a tribunal.

Violating or attempting to violate the Rules of Professional Conduct.

Engaging in conduct involving dishonesty, fraud, deceit, or misrepresentation.

Engaging in conduct prejudicial to the administration of justice.

The Rules of Professional Conduct can be found here.

According to the Corrected Decision issued by the Disciplinary Review Board (DRB) on March 24, 2023, Munday engaged in improper and dishonest conduct by falsely representing to the Passaic Board of Adjustment that he represented individuals who had objected to a proposed redevelopment project, when in fact he had never spoken to or obtained consent from those individuals.

The land use dispute involved an application by Passaic Industrial Properties, LLC to the Board of Adjustment for approval to construct a new McDonald’s restaurant and retail development. Business owners Darren and Sebastian Lentini, who operated several other McDonald’s locations nearby, privately objected to the project out of concern it would draw customers away from their restaurants.

On November 10. 2014, Darren Lentini approached Munday, a partner at McCusker, Anselmi, Rosen & Carvelli, P.C. in Morristown, about opposing the project anonymously. Munday advised that anonymous opposition was unlikely to succeed but said Darren could represent objectors if he found other individuals willing to publicly oppose the project.

Over the course of several hearings before the Board of Adjustment between January and June 2015, Munday falsely claimed to represent individuals who were concerned about the project’s impact. These included a cafe owner named F.B. and two area residents, E.L. and M.L. However, Munday had never directly spoken to or obtained consent from any of these individuals.

Subsequent investigations revealed that F.B. did not actually oppose the project and that the addresses Munday provided for E.L. and M.L. were incorrect. On September 24, 2015, despite no verified consent from the supposed objectors, Munday filed a lawsuit on their behalf challenging the Board of Adjustment’s approval of the project.

After the developer challenged these representations and noted the apparent frivolous nature of the lawsuit, Munday withdrew the complaint in December 2015. However, by this point, Munday had made numerous false statements to the tribunal over the course of several hearings and in official court filings.

The DRB determined in March 2023 that Munday’s conduct violated New Jersey Rules of Professional Conduct regarding frivolous litigation, dishonest statements to a tribunal, and conduct prejudicing the administration of justice.

On December 8, 2023, the Supreme Court issued an order censuring Munday based on the DRB’s decision.

The Disposition states:

“It is ORDERED that William P. Munday 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,”

At the time of writing, Mr. Munday is listed as partner in Anselmi & Carvelli LLP. He attended Rutgers University School of Law-Newark. He acquired his law license in New Jersey in 1980.

A copy of the original filing can be found here.