## Facts

- Robert Forrest, a New Jersey attorney, represented Mr. and Mrs. Fennimore in a personal-injury action arising from a traffic accident.
- After the lawsuit was filed, Mr. Fennimore died of causes unrelated to the accident, and Forrest learned of the death.
- For approximately nine months, Forrest continued prosecuting the action while concealing the client’s death from opposing counsel, the arbitrator, and the court.
- Forrest allegedly advised Mrs. Fennimore to conceal her husband’s death and represented to others that Mr. Fennimore was merely “unavailable.”
- Forrest did not correct discovery responses that implied Mr. Fennimore was alive and did not adequately respond to requests that Mr. Fennimore appear for an independent medical examination.
- Forrest disclosed the death only after a court-ordered medical examination date had passed, when the client could not appear.

## Issues

1. Whether Forrest’s prolonged concealment of his client’s death and related litigation conduct violated the New Jersey Rules of Professional Conduct governing candor to the tribunal, fairness in discovery, and honesty.
2. What sanction was appropriate for sustained, knowing deception affecting ongoing civil litigation.

## Decision

- The Supreme Court of New Jersey found that Forrest committed multiple ethics violations arising from extended concealment and misrepresentation about a material fact in active litigation.
- The Court concluded Forrest violated duties of candor to the tribunal (RPC 3.3), fairness and non-obstruction in discovery (RPC 3.4), and prohibitions on dishonesty, fraud, deceit, or misrepresentation (RPC 8.4).
- The Court imposed a significant disciplinary sanction, including suspension, to protect the public and courts and to deter similar misconduct.

## Legal Principles

- A party’s death during litigation is a material fact; a lawyer must not permit a tribunal or adversary to proceed under a false premise regarding party status and related claims.
- A lawyer’s duty of candor to the tribunal requires disclosure or correction when necessary to avoid assisting a client’s fraudulent conduct; client wishes do not justify deception.
- Concealment that prevents meaningful discovery (including nonproduction for medical examination and failure to correct misleading discovery responses) can constitute obstruction of access to evidence under RPC 3.4.
- Sustained, knowing misrepresentation to a court and opposing counsel constitutes dishonesty and fraud under RPC 8.4 and warrants serious discipline because it harms the administration of justice.
- Attorney discipline is imposed primarily to protect the public and the integrity of the judicial process and to deter future misconduct, not to punish.

## Conclusion

The court disciplined an attorney for deliberately concealing a client’s death while continuing litigation and settlement efforts, holding that prolonged deception violated core duties of candor, fairness in discovery, and honesty and required a meaningful suspension to safeguard the judicial process.


In re Forrest, 158 N.J. 428, 730 A.2d 340 (N.J. 1999)