In re Crumb

66 A.D.3d 1323, 886 N.Y.S.2d 840
CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
DecidedOctober 29, 2009
StatusPublished
Cited by5 cases

This text of 66 A.D.3d 1323 (In re Crumb) 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 Crumb, 66 A.D.3d 1323, 886 N.Y.S.2d 840 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2009).

Opinion

Per Curiam.

Respondent was admitted to practice by the Appellate Division, Fourth Department, in 1981. He maintained a law office in the City of Binghamton, Broome County. He is currently suspended from practice (Matter of Crumb, 50 AD3d 1310 [2008]).

Respondent has not answered or otherwise replied to a petition of charges or to petitioner’s, instant motion for a default judgment, both of which were personally served upon him. In support of its motion, petitioner has filed proof by affidavit of the facts constituting the alleged misconduct. Under the circumstances, respondent is deemed to have admitted the charges and we grant petitioner’s motion (see e.g. Matter of Lucas, 32 AD3d 1150 [2006]). Further, based on such admission and the proof submitted by petitioner, we find respondent guilty of the charged misconduct.

The petition alleges that respondent failed to notify his clients of his receipt of funds in the amount of $35,000 in which the clients had an interest and failed to remit funds belonging to his clients in violation of the attorney disciplinary rules (see Code of Professional Responsibility DR 9-102 [c] [1], [4] [22 NYCRR 1200.46 (c) (1), (4)]);

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

Related

Matter of Castillo
145 A.D.3d 1177 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2016)
MatterofDoyle
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2014
In re Doyle
121 A.D.3d 1401 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2014)
In re Ehrlich
72 A.D.3d 1391 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2010)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
66 A.D.3d 1323, 886 N.Y.S.2d 840, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-crumb-nyappdiv-2009.