In re Horoshko

225 A.D.2d 99, 648 N.Y.2d 105, 648 N.Y.S.2d 105, 1996 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10355
Procedural entryThis page is a short order in In re Horoshko. Read the opinion of the Court — 218 A.D.2d 339

Opinion

OPINION OF THE COURT

Per Curiam.

Respondent Valentine N. Horoshko was admitted to the practice of law in the State of New York by the Second Judicial Department on December 18,1967 as Valentine Nicholas Horosh[100]*100ko. At all times relevant to these proceedings, respondent has maintained an office for the practice of law within the First Judicial Department.

Pursuant to 22 NYCRR 603.4 (e) (1) (i), pending disposition of charges against him, respondent was immediately suspended from the practice of law by order of this Court dated February 22, 1996 (218 AD2d 339). More than six months have elapsed since the date of the suspension order, and respondent has not appeared before the Departmental Disciplinary Committee to answer the charges against him. Nor has he made application to either the Departmental Disciplinary Committee or this Court for a hearing or reinstatement.

Accordingly, the Departmental Disciplinary Committee’s motion to have respondent disbarred pursuant to 22 NYCRR 603.4 (g) is granted, and respondent’s name shall be stricken from the roll of attorneys.

Kupferman, J. P., Ross, Williams, Tom and Mazzarelli, JJ., concur.

Respondent disbarred, and respondent’s name directed to be stricken from the roll of attorneys and counselors-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

In re Horoshko, 225 A.D.2d 99, 648 N.Y.2d 105, 648 N.Y.S.2d 105, 1996 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10355 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1996).

225 A.D.2d 99 (In re Horoshko) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

In re Horoshko
218 A.D.2d 339 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1996)