In re Seelav

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

In re Seelav

249 A.D. 192, 291 N.Y.S. 824, 1936 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5068

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

DecidedDecember 11, 1936

StatusPublished

This text of 249 A.D. 192 (In re Seelav) 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 Seelav, 249 A.D. 192, 291 N.Y.S. 824, 1936 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5068 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1936).

Pincite

Opinion

Per Curiam.

The respondent was retained to prosecute two claims against two insurance companies. He thereafter settled both cases but failed to disclose that fact to his client until after hearings had been commenced before the grievance committee of the petitioner. The respondent contended that there was a dispute with his client as to the amount to which she was entitled and also testified that he placed the money in the Harriman National Bank which was closed, leaving him with insufficient funds. The referee has found that the charges are sustained by the evidence.

The respondent should be suspended for one year with leave to apply for reinstatement at the expiration of that term upon proof of his compliance with the conditions incorporated in the order.

Present — Martin, P. J., McAvoy, O’Malley, Townley and Glennon, JJ.

Respondent suspended for one year.

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

Per Curiam.

The respondent was retained to prosecute two claims against two insurance companies. He thereafter settled both cases but failed to disclose that fact to his client until after hearings had been commenced before the grievance committee of the petitioner. The respondent contended that there was a dispute with his client as to the amount to which she was entitled and also testified that he placed the money in the Harriman National Bank which was closed, leaving him with insufficient funds. The referee has found that the charges are sustained by the evidence.

The respondent should be suspended for one year with leave to apply for reinstatement at the expiration of that term upon proof of his compliance with the conditions incorporated in the order.

Present — Martin, P. J., McAvoy, O’Malley, Townley and Glennon, JJ.

Respondent suspended for one year.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

249 A.D. 192, 291 N.Y.S. 824, 1936 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5068, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-seelav-nyappdiv-1936.