In re Sossner

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

In re Sossner

109 A.D.3d 1020, 971 N.Y.S.2d 67

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

DecidedSeptember 5, 2013

StatusPublished

This text of 109 A.D.3d 1020 (In re Sossner) 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 Sossner, 109 A.D.3d 1020, 971 N.Y.S.2d 67 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2013).

Pincite

Opinion

Per Curiam.

Respondent was admitted to practice by this Court in 1993. He maintains an office for the practice of law in the City of Albany.

By decision dated April 8, 2010, this Court suspended respondent from the practice of law for three years, which suspension was conditionally stayed (Matter of Sossner, 72 AD3d 1268 [2010] ). Respondent now moves for termination of the stayed suspension and provides a supporting affidavit indicating that the conditions of the stay have been fully complied with. Petitioner does not oppose the motion, which we now grant.

Rose, J.E, Lahtinen, Stein and Egan Jr., JJ., concur. Ordered that respondent’s motion is granted, and the stayed suspension imposed by this Court’s decision dated April 8, 2010 is terminated, effective immediately.

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

Per Curiam.

Respondent was admitted to practice by this Court in 1993. He maintains an office for the practice of law in the City of Albany.

By decision dated April 8, 2010, this Court suspended respondent from the practice of law for three years, which suspension was conditionally stayed (Matter of Sossner, 72 AD3d 1268 [2010] ). Respondent now moves for termination of the stayed suspension and provides a supporting affidavit indicating that the conditions of the stay have been fully complied with. Petitioner does not oppose the motion, which we now grant.

Rose, J.E, Lahtinen, Stein and Egan Jr., JJ., concur. Ordered that respondent’s motion is granted, and the stayed suspension imposed by this Court’s decision dated April 8, 2010 is terminated, effective immediately.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

109 A.D.3d 1020, 971 N.Y.S.2d 67, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-sossner-nyappdiv-2013.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack