Diciurcio John

William T. Di Ciurcio II,has been disciplined by Supreme Court of New Jersey for false and misleading communication, violating attorney rules and regulations.Even though disciplinary actions have been taken against him, this attorney has not ceased from violating court rules,regulations and he continues with his deceptive practices.According to the instructions served with my Motion,paragraph 7a,opposition to a Motion (filed by you, the “Respondent”) must be served on the “Movant”and the court no less than 8 days before the return date.As the Movant,I received the alleged response to my Motion, by William T. Di Ciurcio,II, via email, only 2 days before the return date. | And my reply had to be filed 4 days before the return date. Paragraph 7b, The “Movant” may reply to your opposition no less than 4 days before the return date.Also this attorney knows or he should know that he cannot officially serve court papers through email. Paragraph 10 states that, the respondent has to send a copy of their opposition papers and all supporting documents to all parties by regular mail and certified mail.Mr. Di Ciurcio’s deceitful actions denied me,the Movant, the opportunity to reply to the defendant’s opposition before the return date.This was a conspiracy to defraud the court. William T. Di Ciurcio,II should not be practicing law.