In re Diamond

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

In re Diamond

279 A.D. 7, 106 N.Y.S.2d 919, 1951 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2844

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

DecidedOctober 2, 1951

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 279 A.D. 7 (In re Diamond) 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 Diamond, 279 A.D. 7, 106 N.Y.S.2d 919, 1951 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2844 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1951).

Pincite

Opinion

Per Curiam.

Respondent admits that he improperly commingled funds of a client with his own funds. However, all money has now been properly accounted for by respondent who has been frank in his statements to the G-rievance Committee of the Bar Association. The facts not being in dispute, there is no need of a reference of this matter. The court is of opinion that, in view of mitigating circumstances, a censure will be sufficient punishment.

The respondent should be censured.

Peck, P. J., Glennon, Dore, Cohn and Shientag, JJ., concur.

Bespondent censured.

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