In re Feldman

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

In re Feldman

217 A.D.2d 851, 630 N.Y.S.2d 263, 1995 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 8066

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

DecidedJuly 20, 1995

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 217 A.D.2d 851 (In re Feldman) 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 Feldman, 217 A.D.2d 851, 630 N.Y.S.2d 263, 1995 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 8066 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1995).

Pincite

Opinion

Per Curiam.

Respondent, a former New Jersey attorney admitted in this Department in 1981, was disbarred by this Court in 1988 based upon his 1987 disbarment in the State of New Jersey (Matter of Feldman, 140 AD2d 880; see, 22 NYCRR 806.19). He now applies for reinstatement.

After reviewing respondent’s application for reinstatement and the papers submitted therewith, it is concluded that the application should be denied on the ground that respondent has failed to demonstrate by clear and convincing evidence that he possesses the character and general fitness to resume the practice of law (see, 22 NYCRR 806.12 [b]).

Cardona, P. J., Mercure, Crew III, Peters and Spain, JJ., concur. Ordered that application for reinstatement be and the same hereby is denied.

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

Per Curiam.

Respondent, a former New Jersey attorney admitted in this Department in 1981, was disbarred by this Court in 1988 based upon his 1987 disbarment in the State of New Jersey (Matter of Feldman, 140 AD2d 880; see, 22 NYCRR 806.19). He now applies for reinstatement.

After reviewing respondent’s application for reinstatement and the papers submitted therewith, it is concluded that the application should be denied on the ground that respondent has failed to demonstrate by clear and convincing evidence that he possesses the character and general fitness to resume the practice of law (see, 22 NYCRR 806.12 [b]).

Cardona, P. J., Mercure, Crew III, Peters and Spain, JJ., concur. Ordered that application for reinstatement be and the same hereby is denied.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

217 A.D.2d 851, 630 N.Y.S.2d 263, 1995 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 8066, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-feldman-nyappdiv-1995.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack