In re Heyman

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

In re Heyman

252 A.D. 108, 297 N.Y.S. 741, 1937 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5598

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

DecidedJuly 16, 1937

StatusPublished

This text of 252 A.D. 108 (In re Heyman) 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 Heyman, 252 A.D. 108, 297 N.Y.S. 741, 1937 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5598 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1937).

Pincite

Opinion

Per Curiam.

It appears that the respondent entered into a conspiracy with an applicant for admission to the United Odd Fellows Old Age Home and Orphanage to deprive the latter of the sum of $1,268.12, of which the applicant for admission was possessed and which under the by-laws of the borne he was required, upon becoming an inmate, to donate to it. Pursuant to such conspiracy'' the applicant turned the said money over to the respondent upon bis promise that he would repay it upon demand. The respondent applied $816 thereof to his own use. He further deliberately testified falsely in this proceeding.

The respondent should be disbarred.

Present — Martin, P. J., Untermyer, Dore, Cohn and Callahan, JJ.

Respondent disbarred.

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

Per Curiam.

It appears that the respondent entered into a conspiracy with an applicant for admission to the United Odd Fellows Old Age Home and Orphanage to deprive the latter of the sum of $1,268.12, of which the applicant for admission was possessed and which under the by-laws of the borne he was required, upon becoming an inmate, to donate to it. Pursuant to such conspiracy'' the applicant turned the said money over to the respondent upon bis promise that he would repay it upon demand. The respondent applied $816 thereof to his own use. He further deliberately testified falsely in this proceeding.

The respondent should be disbarred.

Present — Martin, P. J., Untermyer, Dore, Cohn and Callahan, JJ.

Respondent disbarred.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

252 A.D. 108, 297 N.Y.S. 741, 1937 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5598, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-heyman-nyappdiv-1937.