In re Goglio

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

In re Goglio

92 A.D.2d 906, 460 N.Y.S.2d 739, 1983 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 17303

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

DecidedMarch 16, 1983

StatusPublished

This text of 92 A.D.2d 906 (In re Goglio) 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 Goglio, 92 A.D.2d 906, 460 N.Y.S.2d 739, 1983 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 17303 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1983).

Pincite

Opinion

— Pursuant to statute (Judiciary Law, § 90, subd 7), the Grievance Committee for the Tenth Judicial District is hereby authorized to institute and prosecute a disciplinary proceeding in this court, as petitioner, against Ferdinand R. Goglio, an attorney and counselor at law, admitted to practice in this court on May 25, 1954, under the name of Ferdinand Richard Goglio, based upon his conviction of a “serious crime”, to wit, on November 23, 1982, respondent pleaded guilty in United States District Court for the Southern District of New York, to giving $5,000 to an Internal Revenue Service appeals officer in violation of title 18 (§ 201, subd [f]) of the United States Code, and on any other acts of professional misconduct [907]*907which may come to its attention. Section 90 (subd 4, par f) of the Judiciary Law requires respondent’s suspension from the practice of law when convicted of a “serious crime” until a final order is made concerning the charges of misconduct. Respondent shall remain suspended until the further order of the court. Francis F. Doran, Chief Counsel to the Joint Bar Association Grievance Committee for the Tenth Judicial District, 158 Third Street, Mineóla, New York, 11501, is hereby appointed as attorney for the petitioner in such proceeding. Mollen, P. J., Damiani, Titone, Lazer and Gulotta, JJ., concur.

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

— Pursuant to statute (Judiciary Law, § 90, subd 7), the Grievance Committee for the Tenth Judicial District is hereby authorized to institute and prosecute a disciplinary proceeding in this court, as petitioner, against Ferdinand R. Goglio, an attorney and counselor at law, admitted to practice in this court on May 25, 1954, under the name of Ferdinand Richard Goglio, based upon his conviction of a “serious crime”, to wit, on November 23, 1982, respondent pleaded guilty in United States District Court for the Southern District of New York, to giving $5,000 to an Internal Revenue Service appeals officer in violation of title 18 (§ 201, subd [f]) of the United States Code, and on any other acts of professional misconduct [907]*907which may come to its attention. Section 90 (subd 4, par f) of the Judiciary Law requires respondent’s suspension from the practice of law when convicted of a “serious crime” until a final order is made concerning the charges of misconduct. Respondent shall remain suspended until the further order of the court. Francis F. Doran, Chief Counsel to the Joint Bar Association Grievance Committee for the Tenth Judicial District, 158 Third Street, Mineóla, New York, 11501, is hereby appointed as attorney for the petitioner in such proceeding. Mollen, P. J., Damiani, Titone, Lazer and Gulotta, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

92 A.D.2d 906, 460 N.Y.S.2d 739, 1983 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 17303, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-goglio-nyappdiv-1983.