In re Schaeffer

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

In re Schaeffer

3 A.D.2d 127, 158 N.Y.S.2d 359, 1957 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6722

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

DecidedJanuary 15, 1957

StatusPublished

This text of 3 A.D.2d 127 (In re Schaeffer) 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 Schaeffer, 3 A.D.2d 127, 158 N.Y.S.2d 359, 1957 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6722 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1957).

Pincite

Opinion

Per Curiam.

Respondent was convicted, after trial in the Court of General Sessions, of violation of section 965 of the Penal Law, in that he exacted payments from prospective tenants for preference in obtaining apartments. Respondent was fined $500, and sentenced to three months in the penitentiary, but the penitentiary sentence was suspended upon condition that he repay the $1,500 to the tenants. Such repayments were made.

Respondent was admitted to practice in 1930 and no other charge of unprofessional conduct has ever been made against him. However, in addition to committing the offense for which he was convicted, he gave false material testimony before the Court of General Sessions, before the Committee on Grievances, and before the Referee in the disciplinary proceedings. Accordingly, respondent should be disbarred.

Peck, P. J., Breitel, Botein and Bergan, JJ., concur.

Respondent disbarred.

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

Per Curiam.

Respondent was convicted, after trial in the Court of General Sessions, of violation of section 965 of the Penal Law, in that he exacted payments from prospective tenants for preference in obtaining apartments. Respondent was fined $500, and sentenced to three months in the penitentiary, but the penitentiary sentence was suspended upon condition that he repay the $1,500 to the tenants. Such repayments were made.

Respondent was admitted to practice in 1930 and no other charge of unprofessional conduct has ever been made against him. However, in addition to committing the offense for which he was convicted, he gave false material testimony before the Court of General Sessions, before the Committee on Grievances, and before the Referee in the disciplinary proceedings. Accordingly, respondent should be disbarred.

Peck, P. J., Breitel, Botein and Bergan, JJ., concur.

Respondent disbarred.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

3 A.D.2d 127, 158 N.Y.S.2d 359, 1957 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6722, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-schaeffer-nyappdiv-1957.