In re Schreiber

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

In re Schreiber

282 A.D. 250, 122 N.Y.S.2d 496, 1953 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4446

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

DecidedJune 23, 1953

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 282 A.D. 250 (In re Schreiber) 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 Schreiber, 282 A.D. 250, 122 N.Y.S.2d 496, 1953 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4446 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1953).

Pincite

Opinion

Per Curiam.

The respondent, an attorney, upon his own admission is guilty of converting funds held by him pursuant to an escrow agreement. He deposited the funds in a special account, where he commingled them with funds of his own and of other clients. He made full restitution, however, after defaulting in an action instituted against him by his client’s former wife, to whom the money was due. While respondent co-operated fully with those prosecuting the charge, his conduct warrants his suspension for a period of six months. The respondent should be suspended for six months.

Peck, P. J., G-lennon, Cohn, Callahan and Breitel, JJ., concur.

Respondent suspended for a period of six months.

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

Per Curiam.

The respondent, an attorney, upon his own admission is guilty of converting funds held by him pursuant to an escrow agreement. He deposited the funds in a special account, where he commingled them with funds of his own and of other clients. He made full restitution, however, after defaulting in an action instituted against him by his client’s former wife, to whom the money was due. While respondent co-operated fully with those prosecuting the charge, his conduct warrants his suspension for a period of six months. The respondent should be suspended for six months.

Peck, P. J., G-lennon, Cohn, Callahan and Breitel, JJ., concur.

Respondent suspended for a period of six months.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

282 A.D. 250, 122 N.Y.S.2d 496, 1953 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4446, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-schreiber-nyappdiv-1953.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack