In re Schwartz

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

In re Schwartz

24 A.D.2d 325, 265 N.Y.S.2d 915, 1966 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5221

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

DecidedJanuary 11, 1966

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 24 A.D.2d 325 (In re Schwartz) 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 Schwartz, 24 A.D.2d 325, 265 N.Y.S.2d 915, 1966 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5221 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1966).

Pincite

Opinion

Per Curiam.

This is a motion to confirm the report of the Referee which sustained charges of professional misconduct against respondent.

Respondent, age 31 years, was admitted to practice December 17, 1958, in the Second Judicial Department. The charges are that (1) between March 28, 1963 and December 19, 1963, on 53 separate occasions respondent failed to appear in the Criminal Court of the City of New York when his cases were first called, and failed to file an affidavit explaining his nonappearance, and that between April 11,1963 and December 26,1963 on 7 separate occasions he failed to make any appearance in such court when his cases appeared on the calendar and failed to file an affidavit explaining his nonappearance. (2) That between April 26, 1963 [326]*326and December 26, 1963, he failed to respond to 20 letters of Associate Administrative Judge Vetbano of the Criminal Court requesting explanations for his nonappearance or failure to file affidavits of explanation. (3) That respondent failed to co-operate with the Committee on Grievances on stated occasions.

On the record the charges are sustained and the report is confirmed. Under the circumstances and in view of respondent’s explanations and apology to the committee and later co-operation, we deem a censure sufficient.

The respondent should be censured for his conduct.

Breitel, J. P., Rabin, Valente, Stevens and Steuer, JJ., concur.

Respondent censured.

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

Per Curiam.

This is a motion to confirm the report of the Referee which sustained charges of professional misconduct against respondent.

Respondent, age 31 years, was admitted to practice December 17, 1958, in the Second Judicial Department. The charges are that (1) between March 28, 1963 and December 19, 1963, on 53 separate occasions respondent failed to appear in the Criminal Court of the City of New York when his cases were first called, and failed to file an affidavit explaining his nonappearance, and that between April 11,1963 and December 26,1963 on 7 separate occasions he failed to make any appearance in such court when his cases appeared on the calendar and failed to file an affidavit explaining his nonappearance. (2) That between April 26, 1963 [326]*326and December 26, 1963, he failed to respond to 20 letters of Associate Administrative Judge Vetbano of the Criminal Court requesting explanations for his nonappearance or failure to file affidavits of explanation. (3) That respondent failed to co-operate with the Committee on Grievances on stated occasions.

On the record the charges are sustained and the report is confirmed. Under the circumstances and in view of respondent’s explanations and apology to the committee and later co-operation, we deem a censure sufficient.

The respondent should be censured for his conduct.

Breitel, J. P., Rabin, Valente, Stevens and Steuer, JJ., concur.

Respondent censured.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

24 A.D.2d 325, 265 N.Y.S.2d 915, 1966 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5221, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-schwartz-nyappdiv-1966.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack