In re Scanlon

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

In re Scanlon

12 A.D.2d 21, 207 N.Y.S.2d 837, 1960 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6572

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

DecidedDecember 8, 1960

StatusPublished

This text of 12 A.D.2d 21 (In re Scanlon) 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 Scanlon, 12 A.D.2d 21, 207 N.Y.S.2d 837, 1960 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6572 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1960).

Pincite

Opinion

Per Curiam.

In this disciplinary proceeding the respondent was admitted to practice on October 18, 1939 at a term of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York, Second Judicial Department. On July 28, 1960, he pleaded guilty to felonies arising from embezzlement and misappropriation of funds as committee of a war veteran incompetent, in violation of section 556a (now § 3501) of title 38 of the United States Code; and has been duly convicted thereof. In consequence of such conviction and pursuant to subdivision 4 of section 90 of the Judiciary Law the respondent has ceased to be an attorney and counsellor-at-law or to be competent to practice law in this State.

Accordingly, the respondent should be disbarred from the practice of law.

Botein, P. J., Breitel, Stevens, Eager and Noonan, JJ., concur.

Respondent disbarred.

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

Per Curiam.

In this disciplinary proceeding the respondent was admitted to practice on October 18, 1939 at a term of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York, Second Judicial Department. On July 28, 1960, he pleaded guilty to felonies arising from embezzlement and misappropriation of funds as committee of a war veteran incompetent, in violation of section 556a (now § 3501) of title 38 of the United States Code; and has been duly convicted thereof. In consequence of such conviction and pursuant to subdivision 4 of section 90 of the Judiciary Law the respondent has ceased to be an attorney and counsellor-at-law or to be competent to practice law in this State.

Accordingly, the respondent should be disbarred from the practice of law.

Botein, P. J., Breitel, Stevens, Eager and Noonan, JJ., concur.

Respondent disbarred.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

12 A.D.2d 21, 207 N.Y.S.2d 837, 1960 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6572, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-scanlon-nyappdiv-1960.