## Facts

- Albert F. Dalena was a New Jersey attorney practicing in Madison, New Jersey.
- Dalena formed a professional association with Carlo Maccallini, an Italian lawyer who was not licensed in New Jersey and was not certified as a foreign legal consultant under N.J. Ct. R. 1:21-9.
- A related entity, “Dalena & Maccallini,” was described as an Italian partnership but used Dalena’s Madison office address on its letterhead despite not maintaining a bona fide New Jersey law office.
- Maryann T. Sagert, an Illinois resident, retained Maccallini regarding administration of her late father’s estate in Italy.
- Dalena prepared and executed a retainer agreement with Sagert in New Jersey using “Dalena & Maccallini” letterhead listing Dalena’s New Jersey address.
- After a fee dispute, Sagert filed an ethics grievance against Maccallini; the local ethics committee dismissed for lack of jurisdiction over a non-New Jersey lawyer.
- The disciplinary authorities investigated Dalena’s role and the business arrangement, focusing on whether the structure facilitated unauthorized practice and misled clients.

## Issues

1. Whether N.J. Ct. R. 1:21-9 requires a foreign attorney to obtain foreign-legal-consultant certification to render foreign-law services from or through New Jersey.
2. Whether Dalena aided or participated in the unauthorized practice of law by associating with an uncertified foreign attorney and holding out a joint practice connected to New Jersey.
3. Whether the firm name, letterhead, and use of a New Jersey address created misleading communications implying that the foreign attorney was authorized to practice in New Jersey.
4. What discipline was appropriate for the established misconduct.

## Decision

- The Supreme Court of New Jersey found that the arrangement, as structured and presented to clients, violated New Jersey restrictions governing practice by foreign lawyers and related professional-conduct rules.
- The Court concluded that Dalena’s conduct facilitated unauthorized practice by Maccallini in New Jersey and that the joint branding and New Jersey address were misleading.
- The Court imposed a public disciplinary sanction on Dalena.

## Legal Principles

- A foreign attorney who maintains a presence in New Jersey to provide legal services, even if limited to foreign law, must comply with the certification and regulatory requirements of N.J. Ct. R. 1:21-9.
- A New Jersey attorney may not assist the unauthorized practice of law, including by lending the attorney’s name, office address, or professional identification to a non-admitted or uncertified lawyer in a manner that suggests authorization to practice in New Jersey.
- Firm names, letterhead, and other communications about legal services may not be false or misleading, including by implying licensure, certification, or affiliations that do not exist.
- Disciplinary enforcement in this setting serves client protection by ensuring regulatory oversight of those providing legal services from or through New Jersey.

## Conclusion

The Court disciplined Dalena for structuring and presenting a cross-border association in a way that bypassed New Jersey’s foreign-legal-consultant requirements, enabled unauthorized practice, and misled clients through joint firm identification and use of a New Jersey office address.


In re Dalena, 157 N.J. 242 (1999)