In re Lee

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

In re Lee

86 A.D.2d 131, 449 N.Y.S.2d 7, 1982 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 15377

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

DecidedApril 5, 1982

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 86 A.D.2d 131 (In re Lee) 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 Lee, 86 A.D.2d 131, 449 N.Y.S.2d 7, 1982 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 15377 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1982).

Pincite

Opinion

OPINION OF THE COURT

Per Curiam.

The respondent was admitted to practice by this court on January 25,1967 under the name of Stephen Kenneth Lee. In this proceeding to discipline him for professional misconduct, the petitioner moves to confirm in full the findings of the referee sustaining seven charges of professional misconduct, including, inter alia, filing suits on behalf of himself and his client knowing said actions would serve merely to harass or maliciously injure another; making of false statements of fact; counseling clients in fraudulent conduct; defying a court order; neglecting two separate legal matters entrusted to him; and failing to co-operate with the investigation of the Grievance Committee. Respondent submits an affidavit requesting an adjournment of petitioner’s motion.

[132]*132After reviewing all of the evidence, we are in full agreement with the report of the referee. The respondent is guilty of the charges of misconduct. The petitioner’s motion is granted. Respondent’s application is denied.

The respondent is adjudged guilty of serious professional misconduct and should be, and hereby is, disbarred from the further practice of law, and his name is ordered stricken from the roll of attorneys and counselors at law, effective forthwith.

Mollen, P. J., Damiani, Titone, Lazer and Gibbons, JJ., concur.

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

OPINION OF THE COURT

Per Curiam.

The respondent was admitted to practice by this court on January 25,1967 under the name of Stephen Kenneth Lee. In this proceeding to discipline him for professional misconduct, the petitioner moves to confirm in full the findings of the referee sustaining seven charges of professional misconduct, including, inter alia, filing suits on behalf of himself and his client knowing said actions would serve merely to harass or maliciously injure another; making of false statements of fact; counseling clients in fraudulent conduct; defying a court order; neglecting two separate legal matters entrusted to him; and failing to co-operate with the investigation of the Grievance Committee. Respondent submits an affidavit requesting an adjournment of petitioner’s motion.

[132]*132After reviewing all of the evidence, we are in full agreement with the report of the referee. The respondent is guilty of the charges of misconduct. The petitioner’s motion is granted. Respondent’s application is denied.

The respondent is adjudged guilty of serious professional misconduct and should be, and hereby is, disbarred from the further practice of law, and his name is ordered stricken from the roll of attorneys and counselors at law, effective forthwith.

Mollen, P. J., Damiani, Titone, Lazer and Gibbons, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

86 A.D.2d 131, 449 N.Y.S.2d 7, 1982 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 15377, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-lee-nyappdiv-1982.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack