In re McKelvey

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

In re McKelvey

259 A.D.2d 66, 696 N.Y.S.2d 319, 1999 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7378

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

DecidedJune 18, 1999

StatusPublished

This text of 259 A.D.2d 66 (In re McKelvey) 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 McKelvey, 259 A.D.2d 66, 696 N.Y.S.2d 319, 1999 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7378 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1999).

Pincite

Opinion

OPINION OF THE COURT

Per Curiam.

Respondent was admitted to the practice of law by this Court on February 28, 1974, and maintains an office in Silver Creek. The Grievance Committee filed a petition charging respondent [67]*67with trust account improprieties and other acts of professional misconduct.

Respondent admitted the material allegations of the petition and submitted matters in mitigation.

We conclude that respondent violated the following Disciplinary Rules of the Code of Professional Responsibility: DR 1-102 (A) (8) and DR 9-102 (A), (B), (D) and (E) (22 NYCRR 1200.3 [a] [8]; 1200.46 [a], [b], [d], [e]).

In mitigation, we note that respondent expressed remorse for his misconduct and has corrected his bookkeeping practices. Additionally, no client suffered a financial loss as a result of respondent’s misconduct. Accordingly, we conclude that respondent should be censured.

Pine, J. P., Lawton, Hayes, Wisner and Hurlbutt, JJ., concur.

Order of censure entered.

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