In re Kaufman

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

In re Kaufman

46 A.D.2d 489, 363 N.Y.S.2d 324, 1975 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 8525

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

DecidedJanuary 28, 1975

StatusPublished

Cited by4 cases

This text of 46 A.D.2d 489 (In re Kaufman) 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 Kaufman, 46 A.D.2d 489, 363 N.Y.S.2d 324, 1975 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 8525 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1975).

Pincite

Opinion

Per Curiam.

Respondent was admitted to practice in the First Judicial Department on March 11,1940.

On July 25, 1974, he was sentenced to concurrent four-year terms of imprisonment following his conviction, inter alia, of the crimes of unlawfully, willfully and knowingly, and contrary [490]*490to an oath, making false declarations to a Grand Jury (U. S. Code, tit. 18, § 1623) and of bribery (tit. 18, § 201, subd. [b]). Said offenses are felonies under both Federal statute (IT. S. Code, tit. 18, § 1) and the laws of this iState (Penal Law, §§ 210.15, 200.00).

Petitioner, the Association of the Bar of the City of New York, by the instant application, seeks to have respondent’s name stricken from the roll of attorneys. Such action is mandatory (Judiciary Law, § 90, subd. 4; Matter of Sheinman, 277 App. Div. 39).

Accordingly, the petition should be granted and respondent’s name stricken from the roll of attorneys.

Nunez, J. P., Kupferman, Murphy, Lupiano and Tilzer, JJ., concur.

Respondent’s name struck from the roll of attorneys and counselors at law in the State of New York.

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