In re Sullivan

246 A.D. 393, 286 N.Y.S. 318, 1936 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 9512
CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
DecidedMarch 13, 1936
StatusPublished
Cited by2 cases

This text of 246 A.D. 393 (In re Sullivan) 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 Sullivan, 246 A.D. 393, 286 N.Y.S. 318, 1936 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 9512 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1936).

Opinion

Per Curiam.

On July 29, 1935, the respondent was sentenced to serve a term of imprisonment in the Ohio Penitentiary at Columbus, Ohio, for a term of not less than one year nor more than five years and to pay a fine of $1,000. He had previously been convicted after a trial in the Court of Common Pleas of Guernsey county, Ohio, on an indictment returned against him charging him with “ Selling Securities without License; Selling Unregistered Securities,” in violation of section 8624 of the Ohio Securities Act. That act provides that upon conviction the defendant shall be imprisoned in the penitentiary not more than five years or fined in a sum not exceeding $5,000, or both.

The General Code of the State of Ohio, by section 12372 thereof, defines felonies as follows: Offenses which may be punished by death, or by imprisonment in the penitentiary, are felonies.”

Section 477 of the Judiciary Law of New York provides: “ Any person being an attorney and counsellor-at-law, who shall be convicted of a felony, shall, upon such conviction, cease to be an attorney and counsellor-at-law, or to be competent to practice law as such.”

Subdivision 3 of section 88 of the Judiciary Law provides: Whenever any attorney and counsellor-at-law shall be convicted of a felony, there may be presented to the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court a certified or exemplified copy of the judgment of such conviction, and thereupon the name of the person [394]*394so convicted shall, by order of the court, be stricken from the roll of attorneys.”

The statute is mandatory and requires, therefore, that the respondent be disbarred.

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

Respondent disbarred.

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

Related

In re the Estate of Thompson
75 Misc. 2d 508 (New York Surrogate's Court, 1973)
In re the Probate of the Will of Johnson
202 Misc. 751 (New York Surrogate's Court, 1952)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
246 A.D. 393, 286 N.Y.S. 318, 1936 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 9512, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-sullivan-nyappdiv-1936.