In re Carroll

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

In re Carroll

203 A.D.2d 711, 612 N.Y.S.2d 959

Procedural entryThis page is a short order in In re Carroll. Read the opinion of the Court — 193 A.D.2d 881 →

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided April 20, 1994·Published

Opinion

Per Curiam.

By decision dated June 15, 1993, respondent was suspended by this Court for a period of six months, effective May 28, 1993 (see, Matter of Carroll, 193 AD2d 881, 194 AD2d 921). He now applies for reinstatement.

Our examination of the papers submitted on this application indicates that respondent has complied with the provisions of section 806.9 of the Court’s rules [22 NYCRR 806.9] regarding the conduct of suspended lawyers and has complied with the requirements of section 806.12 regarding reinstatement. Petitioner has advised that it has no opposition to respondent’s reinstatement. Accordingly, respondent’s application is granted and he is reinstated to the practice of law, effective immediately.

Mikoll, J. P., Mercure, Crew III, White and Yesawich Jr., JJ., concur. Ordered that respondent’s application is granted and he 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

Per Curiam.

By decision dated June 15, 1993, respondent was suspended by this Court for a period of six months, effective May 28, 1993 (see, Matter of Carroll, 193 AD2d 881, 194 AD2d 921). He now applies for reinstatement.

Our examination of the papers submitted on this application indicates that respondent has complied with the provisions of section 806.9 of the Court’s rules [22 NYCRR 806.9] regarding the conduct of suspended lawyers and has complied with the requirements of section 806.12 regarding reinstatement. Petitioner has advised that it has no opposition to respondent’s reinstatement. Accordingly, respondent’s application is granted and he is reinstated to the practice of law, effective immediately.

Mikoll, J. P., Mercure, Crew III, White and Yesawich Jr., JJ., concur. Ordered that respondent’s application is granted and he is reinstated as an attorney and counselor-at-law in the State of New York, effective immediately.

In re Carroll, 203 A.D.2d 711, 612 N.Y.S.2d 959 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1994).

Pincite

203 A.D.2d 711 (In re Carroll) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related