In re Schurkman

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

In re Schurkman

37 A.D.2d 37, 322 N.Y.S.2d 377, 1971 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3782

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

DecidedJune 22, 1971

StatusPublished

This text of 37 A.D.2d 37 (In re Schurkman) 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 Schurkman, 37 A.D.2d 37, 322 N.Y.S.2d 377, 1971 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3782 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1971).

Pincite

Opinion

Per Curiam.

The respondent was admitted to practice in the Second Judicial Department on April 7, 1962. The crux of the matter here is the arrangement for payment of a bribe to a union official to obtain a subcontract requiring union clearance; a loan of money at a usurious rate of interest, and the securing of the services of persons to collect this money by threat of physical violence; and that respondent discriminated against a black workman because of race and color in violation of the Penal Law, [38]*38to which latter charge he pleaded guilty after indictment for conspiracy and extortion.

The report of the Referee finding the charges to have been sustained is supported by the evidence and is sustained. Respondent’s co-operation with the District Attorney and his several appearances before the Grand Jury wherein he signed a waiver of immunity which led to several indictments against other malefactors, resulted in his being allowed to plead to a lesser charge and receiving a suspended sentence, but his actions were such that he should be disbarred.

Stevens, P. J., Capozzoli, Nunez, Kupferman and McNally, JJ., concur.

Respondent disbarred, effective July 22, 1971.

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

Per Curiam.

The respondent was admitted to practice in the Second Judicial Department on April 7, 1962. The crux of the matter here is the arrangement for payment of a bribe to a union official to obtain a subcontract requiring union clearance; a loan of money at a usurious rate of interest, and the securing of the services of persons to collect this money by threat of physical violence; and that respondent discriminated against a black workman because of race and color in violation of the Penal Law, [38]*38to which latter charge he pleaded guilty after indictment for conspiracy and extortion.

The report of the Referee finding the charges to have been sustained is supported by the evidence and is sustained. Respondent’s co-operation with the District Attorney and his several appearances before the Grand Jury wherein he signed a waiver of immunity which led to several indictments against other malefactors, resulted in his being allowed to plead to a lesser charge and receiving a suspended sentence, but his actions were such that he should be disbarred.

Stevens, P. J., Capozzoli, Nunez, Kupferman and McNally, JJ., concur.

Respondent disbarred, effective July 22, 1971.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

37 A.D.2d 37, 322 N.Y.S.2d 377, 1971 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3782, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-schurkman-nyappdiv-1971.