In re Finnerty

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

In re Finnerty

11 A.D.3d 719, 782 N.Y.S.2d 685, 2004 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11837

Procedural entryThis page is a short order in In re Finnerty. Read the opinion of the Court — 296 A.D.2d 820 →

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided October 14, 2004·Published

Opinion

Per Curiam.

By decision dated July 25, 2002, respondent was suspended by this Court for a term of two years (Matter of Finnerty, 296 AD2d 820 [2002]). Respondent now applies for reinstatement. Our examination of the application submitted indicates that respondent has complied with the provisions of the order of suspension and with this Court’s rules regarding the conduct of suspended attorneys (see 22 NYCRR 806.9). He has also complied with the requirements of this Court’s rules regarding reinstatement (see 22 NYCRR 806.12). Petitioner has advised that it does not oppose the application. The application is granted and respondent is reinstated to the practice of law effective immediately.

Cardona, P.J., Mercure, Spain, Carpinello and Lahtinen, JJ., concur. Ordered that respondent’s application is granted and he is reinstated to practice as an attorney and counselor-at-law in the State of New York, effective immediately.

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

Per Curiam.

By decision dated July 25, 2002, respondent was suspended by this Court for a term of two years (Matter of Finnerty, 296 AD2d 820 [2002]). Respondent now applies for reinstatement. Our examination of the application submitted indicates that respondent has complied with the provisions of the order of suspension and with this Court’s rules regarding the conduct of suspended attorneys (see 22 NYCRR 806.9). He has also complied with the requirements of this Court’s rules regarding reinstatement (see 22 NYCRR 806.12). Petitioner has advised that it does not oppose the application. The application is granted and respondent is reinstated to the practice of law effective immediately.

Cardona, P.J., Mercure, Spain, Carpinello and Lahtinen, JJ., concur. Ordered that respondent’s application is granted and he is reinstated to practice as an attorney and counselor-at-law in the State of New York, effective immediately.

In re Finnerty, 11 A.D.3d 719, 782 N.Y.S.2d 685, 2004 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11837 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2004).

Pincite

11 A.D.3d 719 (In re Finnerty) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related