In re Jonas

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

In re Jonas

26 A.D.2d 87, 270 N.Y.S.2d 1021, 1966 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3981

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

DecidedJune 16, 1966

StatusPublished

This text of 26 A.D.2d 87 (In re Jonas) 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 Jonas, 26 A.D.2d 87, 270 N.Y.S.2d 1021, 1966 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3981 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1966).

Pincite

Opinion

Per Curiam.

Respondent in this disciplinary proceeding was admitted to practice on May 5, 1937 at a term of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York, Second Judicial Department.

On February 24, 1966 respondent was convicted, upon his plea of guilty, of a violation of section 657 of title 18 of the United States Code, in that he as an employee of a Federal Credit Union, insured by the Federal Savings and Loan Insurance Corporation, did knowingly embezzle moneys entrusted to his care of the value of more than $100. The said offense is a felony under .the law of New York State (Penal Law, §§ 1296, 1297; §§ 2, 2183). Upon .said conviction respondent automatically ceased to be an attorney. (Judiciary Law, § 90, subd. 4; Matter of Ginsberg, 1 N Y 2d 144.)

Accordingly, respondent should be disbarred from the practice of law.

Botein, P. J., McNally, Eager, Steuer and Capozzoli, JJ., concur.

Respondent struck from the roll of attorneys and counselors at law in the State of New York pursuant to subdivision 4 of section 90 of the Judiciary Law of the State of New York.

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

Per Curiam.

Respondent in this disciplinary proceeding was admitted to practice on May 5, 1937 at a term of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York, Second Judicial Department.

On February 24, 1966 respondent was convicted, upon his plea of guilty, of a violation of section 657 of title 18 of the United States Code, in that he as an employee of a Federal Credit Union, insured by the Federal Savings and Loan Insurance Corporation, did knowingly embezzle moneys entrusted to his care of the value of more than $100. The said offense is a felony under .the law of New York State (Penal Law, §§ 1296, 1297; §§ 2, 2183). Upon .said conviction respondent automatically ceased to be an attorney. (Judiciary Law, § 90, subd. 4; Matter of Ginsberg, 1 N Y 2d 144.)

Accordingly, respondent should be disbarred from the practice of law.

Botein, P. J., McNally, Eager, Steuer and Capozzoli, JJ., concur.

Respondent struck from the roll of attorneys and counselors at law in the State of New York pursuant to subdivision 4 of section 90 of the Judiciary Law of the State of New York.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

26 A.D.2d 87, 270 N.Y.S.2d 1021, 1966 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3981, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-jonas-nyappdiv-1966.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack