In re Atlas

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

In re Atlas

12 A.D.3d 929, 784 N.Y.S.2d 398, 2004 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 13727

CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

DecidedNovember 18, 2004

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 12 A.D.3d 929 (In re Atlas) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

In re Atlas, 12 A.D.3d 929, 784 N.Y.S.2d 398, 2004 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 13727 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2004).

Pincite

Opinion

Per Curiam.

Respondent was admitted to practice in New York by this Court in 1990 and was previously admitted to practice in Pennsylvania where she maintained a law office.

The Supreme Court of Pennsylvania suspended respondent from the practice of law for three years, effective June 29, 2004, for knowingly and intentionally converting third-party funds, [930]*930misrepresenting her receipt of funds and engaging in false certifications in her attorney annual fee forms.

Petitioner moves for an order imposing reciprocal discipline on respondent (see 22 NYCRR 806.19). Respondent does not oppose petitioner’s motion but requests that any suspension be made concurrent with the Pennsylvania discipline. In mitigation, respondent states that she has no prior disciplinary offenses and suffers from chemical dependence and depression for which she is successfully treating. However, we note that respondent has not made restitution of the converted funds and has committed a serious offense involving dishonesty, fraud, deceit and misrepresentation. Therefore, we conclude that respondent should be reciprocally suspended for a period of three years, effective immediately and until further order of this Court.

Crew III, J.P., Peters, Spain, Carpinello and Mugglin, JJ., concur. Ordered that petitioner’s motion for reciprocal discipline is granted; and it is further ordered that respondent is suspended from the practice of law in New York for a period of three years, effective immediately and until further order of this Court; and it is further ordered that respondent is commanded to desist and refrain from the practice of law in any form, either as principal or as agent, clerk or employee of another; respondent is forbidden to appear as an attorney or counselor-at-law before any court, judge, justice, board, commission or other public authority; or to give to another an opinion as to the law or its application, or any advice with relation thereto; and it is further ordered that respondent shall comply with the provisions of this Court’s rules regulating the conduct of suspended attorneys (see 22 NYCRR 806.9).

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Per Curiam.

Respondent was admitted to practice in New York by this Court in 1990 and was previously admitted to practice in Pennsylvania where she maintained a law office.

The Supreme Court of Pennsylvania suspended respondent from the practice of law for three years, effective June 29, 2004, for knowingly and intentionally converting third-party funds, [930]*930misrepresenting her receipt of funds and engaging in false certifications in her attorney annual fee forms.

Petitioner moves for an order imposing reciprocal discipline on respondent (see 22 NYCRR 806.19). Respondent does not oppose petitioner’s motion but requests that any suspension be made concurrent with the Pennsylvania discipline. In mitigation, respondent states that she has no prior disciplinary offenses and suffers from chemical dependence and depression for which she is successfully treating. However, we note that respondent has not made restitution of the converted funds and has committed a serious offense involving dishonesty, fraud, deceit and misrepresentation. Therefore, we conclude that respondent should be reciprocally suspended for a period of three years, effective immediately and until further order of this Court.

Crew III, J.P., Peters, Spain, Carpinello and Mugglin, JJ., concur. Ordered that petitioner’s motion for reciprocal discipline is granted; and it is further ordered that respondent is suspended from the practice of law in New York for a period of three years, effective immediately and until further order of this Court; and it is further ordered that respondent is commanded to desist and refrain from the practice of law in any form, either as principal or as agent, clerk or employee of another; respondent is forbidden to appear as an attorney or counselor-at-law before any court, judge, justice, board, commission or other public authority; or to give to another an opinion as to the law or its application, or any advice with relation thereto; and it is further ordered that respondent shall comply with the provisions of this Court’s rules regulating the conduct of suspended attorneys (see 22 NYCRR 806.9).

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

12 A.D.3d 929, 784 N.Y.S.2d 398, 2004 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 13727, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-atlas-nyappdiv-2004.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack