In re Fields

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

In re Fields

36 A.D.2d 277, 319 N.Y.S.2d 993, 1971 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4229

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

DecidedApril 20, 1971

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 36 A.D.2d 277 (In re Fields) 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 Fields, 36 A.D.2d 277, 319 N.Y.S.2d 993, 1971 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4229 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1971).

Pincite

Opinion

Per Curiam.

Respondent was admitted to practice in the Second Judicial Department on May 8,1935.

Serious allegations (one charge) of professional misconduct were preferred against respondent involving, among other things, commingling and converting a client’s funds, settling the claim of a client and her two infant children without the client’s knowledge or consent, forging his client’s name to a petition and related documents seeking approval of the unauthorized settlement in the Surrogate’s Court, falsely certifying a copy of the order issued by that court, thereby converting his client’s funds. It appears that he made full restitution to his client for these conversions.

The Referee, in a painstaking report, has sustained all charges made against respondent and the record fully supports his findings. His report is confirmed.

The respondent has been guilty of professional misconduct of the type which demonstrates his unfitness to continue as a member of the Bar. (Matter of Hoffman, 30 A D 2d 163.) In view of the gravity of his misconduct respondent should be disbarred. (Matter of Whitaker, 30 A D 2d 162.)

Stevens, P. J., Capozzoli, McGivern, Markewich and Tilzer, JJ., concur.

Respondent disbarred effective May 20, 1971.

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

Per Curiam.

Respondent was admitted to practice in the Second Judicial Department on May 8,1935.

Serious allegations (one charge) of professional misconduct were preferred against respondent involving, among other things, commingling and converting a client’s funds, settling the claim of a client and her two infant children without the client’s knowledge or consent, forging his client’s name to a petition and related documents seeking approval of the unauthorized settlement in the Surrogate’s Court, falsely certifying a copy of the order issued by that court, thereby converting his client’s funds. It appears that he made full restitution to his client for these conversions.

The Referee, in a painstaking report, has sustained all charges made against respondent and the record fully supports his findings. His report is confirmed.

The respondent has been guilty of professional misconduct of the type which demonstrates his unfitness to continue as a member of the Bar. (Matter of Hoffman, 30 A D 2d 163.) In view of the gravity of his misconduct respondent should be disbarred. (Matter of Whitaker, 30 A D 2d 162.)

Stevens, P. J., Capozzoli, McGivern, Markewich and Tilzer, JJ., concur.

Respondent disbarred effective May 20, 1971.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

36 A.D.2d 277, 319 N.Y.S.2d 993, 1971 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4229, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-fields-nyappdiv-1971.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack