In re Attorneys in Violation of Judiciary Law § 468-a

92 A.D.3d 1205, 938 N.Y.2d 824
Procedural entryThis page is a short order in In re Attorneys in Violation of Judiciary Law § 468-a. Read the opinion of the Court — 65 A.D.3d 1447

Opinion

Per Curiam.

. Mercure, A.EJ., Peters, Rose, Lahtinen and Spain, JJ., concur. Ordered that respondent’s application is granted; and it is further ordered that respondent is reinstated as an attorney and counselor-at-law in the State of New York, effective immediately.

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

In re Attorneys in Violation of Judiciary Law § 468-a, 92 A.D.3d 1205, 938 N.Y.2d 824 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2012).

92 A.D.3d 1205 (In re Attorneys in Violation of Judiciary Law § 468-a) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.