In re Queens County Bar Association in Respect of Moller

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

In re Queens County Bar Association in Respect of Moller

248 A.D. 877, 290 N.Y.S. 257, 1936 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7860

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided October 5, 1936·Published·Cited by 2 cases

Opinion

The respondent is suspended from the practice of the law for a period of three years. In May, 1935, respondent was censured for “ gross carelessness and a reprehensible indifference ” to his client’s interests as well as to his own, before the bar association and this [878]*878court. [See 244 App. Div. 819.] He is again before the court, having neglected and shown indifference in handling the affairs of clients. He paid no attention to the request of the bar association to attend before it. He filed no answer to the petition presented to this court although he appeared on the return day. On the motion to confirm the referee’s report he failed to appear or to file a brief. Respondent evidently has lost interest in the practice of Ms profession. A period of suspension may restore him to a full realization of Ms duties and responsibilities. Present — Lazansky, P. J., Young, Hagarty, Carswell and Davis, JJ.

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

The respondent is suspended from the practice of the law for a period of three years. In May, 1935, respondent was censured for “ gross carelessness and a reprehensible indifference ” to his client’s interests as well as to his own, before the bar association and this [878]*878court. [See 244 App. Div. 819.] He is again before the court, having neglected and shown indifference in handling the affairs of clients. He paid no attention to the request of the bar association to attend before it. He filed no answer to the petition presented to this court although he appeared on the return day. On the motion to confirm the referee’s report he failed to appear or to file a brief. Respondent evidently has lost interest in the practice of Ms profession. A period of suspension may restore him to a full realization of Ms duties and responsibilities. Present — Lazansky, P. J., Young, Hagarty, Carswell and Davis, JJ.

In re Queens County Bar Association in Respect of Moller, 248 A.D. 877, 290 N.Y.S. 257, 1936 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7860 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1936).

Pincite

248 A.D. 877 (In re Queens County Bar Association in Respect of Moller) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related