In re Davis

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

In re Davis

18 A.D.2d 818, 1963 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5037

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

DecidedJanuary 7, 1963

StatusPublished

This text of 18 A.D.2d 818 (In re Davis) 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 Davis, 18 A.D.2d 818, 1963 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5037 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1963).

Pincite

Opinion

In a disciplinary proceeding, the Official Referee filed his report in which he found respondent guilty of two of the charges of professional misconduct made against him and in which the Referee recommended that respondent be suspended from practice for one year. Petitioner now moves to confirm the findings of the Official Referee, but to dis-affirm his recommendation as to discipline, and to disbar respondent. Motion to confirm the Referee’s findings and to disaffirm the recommendation granted. The findings are confirmed; respondent is disbarred and his name ordered to be striiek from the roll of attorneys. In our opinion, respondent’s misconduct was of such a serious nature as to require his disbarment. Beldoek, P. J., Kleinfeld, Brennan, Hill and Rabin, JJ., concur.

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

In a disciplinary proceeding, the Official Referee filed his report in which he found respondent guilty of two of the charges of professional misconduct made against him and in which the Referee recommended that respondent be suspended from practice for one year. Petitioner now moves to confirm the findings of the Official Referee, but to dis-affirm his recommendation as to discipline, and to disbar respondent. Motion to confirm the Referee’s findings and to disaffirm the recommendation granted. The findings are confirmed; respondent is disbarred and his name ordered to be striiek from the roll of attorneys. In our opinion, respondent’s misconduct was of such a serious nature as to require his disbarment. Beldoek, P. J., Kleinfeld, Brennan, Hill and Rabin, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

18 A.D.2d 818, 1963 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5037, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-davis-nyappdiv-1963.