In re Murphy

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

In re Murphy

174 A.D.2d 85, 579 N.Y.S.2d 872, 1992 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 721

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

DecidedJanuary 28, 1992

StatusPublished

This text of 174 A.D.2d 85 (In re Murphy) 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 Murphy, 174 A.D.2d 85, 579 N.Y.S.2d 872, 1992 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 721 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1992).

Pincite

Opinion

OPINION OF THE COURT

Per Curiam.

Respondent Michael D. Murphy was admitted to practice as an attorney and counselor-at-law in the State of New York by the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court, First Judicial Department, on June 21, 1982.

By affidavit dated November 15, 1991, respondent moved to [86]*86submit his resignation pursuant to 22 NYCRR 603.11 as a member of the New York State Bar. In that regard, an examination of respondent’s papers indicates that his affidavit of resignation fully complies with the requirements of this court’s rules relating to the conduct of attorneys. He acknowledges that he is the subject of a pending investigation into allegations that he has been guilty of misconduct by improperly disbursing and applying escrow funds maintained in a client trust account; that his resignation is freely and voluntarily tendered; that he has not been subjected to coercion or duress; that he is fully aware of the implications of tendering his resignation; and that if charges were ultimately predicated upon the conduct for which he is under investigation, he could not successfully defend himself on the merits against such charges. Respondent has also submitted his resignation pursuant to section 605.10 of the rules of this court (22 NYCRR) to the chief counsel of the Departmental Disciplinary Committee, who recommends that the resignation be accepted.

Accordingly, respondent’s resignation from the New York State Bar as an attorney and counselor-at-law is accepted, and respondent’s name is stricken from the roll of attorneys, effective November 15, 1991, the date of the affidavit of resignation.

Sullivan, J. P., Milonas, Ellerin, Kassal and Smith, JJ., concur.

Respondent’s resignation is accepted and his name stricken from the roll of attorneys and counselors-at-law in the State of New York, effective January 28,1991.

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

OPINION OF THE COURT

Per Curiam.

Respondent Michael D. Murphy was admitted to practice as an attorney and counselor-at-law in the State of New York by the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court, First Judicial Department, on June 21, 1982.

By affidavit dated November 15, 1991, respondent moved to [86]*86submit his resignation pursuant to 22 NYCRR 603.11 as a member of the New York State Bar. In that regard, an examination of respondent’s papers indicates that his affidavit of resignation fully complies with the requirements of this court’s rules relating to the conduct of attorneys. He acknowledges that he is the subject of a pending investigation into allegations that he has been guilty of misconduct by improperly disbursing and applying escrow funds maintained in a client trust account; that his resignation is freely and voluntarily tendered; that he has not been subjected to coercion or duress; that he is fully aware of the implications of tendering his resignation; and that if charges were ultimately predicated upon the conduct for which he is under investigation, he could not successfully defend himself on the merits against such charges. Respondent has also submitted his resignation pursuant to section 605.10 of the rules of this court (22 NYCRR) to the chief counsel of the Departmental Disciplinary Committee, who recommends that the resignation be accepted.

Accordingly, respondent’s resignation from the New York State Bar as an attorney and counselor-at-law is accepted, and respondent’s name is stricken from the roll of attorneys, effective November 15, 1991, the date of the affidavit of resignation.

Sullivan, J. P., Milonas, Ellerin, Kassal and Smith, JJ., concur.

Respondent’s resignation is accepted and his name stricken from the roll of attorneys and counselors-at-law in the State of New York, effective January 28,1991.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

174 A.D.2d 85, 579 N.Y.S.2d 872, 1992 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 721, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-murphy-nyappdiv-1992.