In re Falk

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

In re Falk

63 A.D.2d 551, 408 N.Y.S.2d 76, 1978 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11376

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

DecidedAugust 24, 1978

StatusPublished

This text of 63 A.D.2d 551 (In re Falk) 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 Falk, 63 A.D.2d 551, 408 N.Y.S.2d 76, 1978 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11376 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1978).

Pincite

Opinion

OPINION OF THE COURT

Per Curiam.

Respondent was admitted to the Bar on October 15, 1958 in the Second Department. He was convicted on a plea of guilty of grand larceny in the third degree (Penal Law, § 155.30), a class E felony, in Supreme Court, New York County, on February 27, 1978 and sentenced to a term of 60 days imprisonment and 4 years 10 months probation. Having been convicted of a felony in the courts of this State, respondent has ceased to be an attorney. (Judiciary Law, § 90, subd 4; Matter of Ginsberg, 1 NY2d 144.) Upon motion of the Committee on Grievances, respondent’s name should be stricken from the roll of attorneys of this State.

[552]*552The motion is granted and the respondent’s name should be stricken from the roll of attorneys.

Murphy, P. J., Silverman, Evans, Lane and Markewich, JJ., concur.

Respondent’s name stricken from the roll of attorneys and counselors at law in the State of New York.

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

OPINION OF THE COURT

Per Curiam.

Respondent was admitted to the Bar on October 15, 1958 in the Second Department. He was convicted on a plea of guilty of grand larceny in the third degree (Penal Law, § 155.30), a class E felony, in Supreme Court, New York County, on February 27, 1978 and sentenced to a term of 60 days imprisonment and 4 years 10 months probation. Having been convicted of a felony in the courts of this State, respondent has ceased to be an attorney. (Judiciary Law, § 90, subd 4; Matter of Ginsberg, 1 NY2d 144.) Upon motion of the Committee on Grievances, respondent’s name should be stricken from the roll of attorneys of this State.

[552]*552The motion is granted and the respondent’s name should be stricken from the roll of attorneys.

Murphy, P. J., Silverman, Evans, Lane and Markewich, JJ., concur.

Respondent’s name stricken from the roll of attorneys and counselors at law in the State of New York.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

63 A.D.2d 551, 408 N.Y.S.2d 76, 1978 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11376, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-falk-nyappdiv-1978.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack