In re Teitler
This text of 99 A.D.2d 152 (In re Teitler) 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.
Opinion
opinion of the court
Respondent was admitted to practice by this court on March 13,1968. In this proceeding to discipline respondent for professional misconduct petitioner moves, inter alia, to confirm the report of the special referee and respondent cross-moves to confirm in part and disaffirm in part said report.
The special referee found respondent guilty, inter alia, of five separate allegations of converting to his own use sums received for medical, lost wage or housekeeping claims, totaling approximately $5,200; numerous separate allega[153]*153tions of submitting false and fraudulent medical bills and/or reports to insurance companies; five separate allegations of submitting to insurance carriers false and fraudulent lost wage or housekeeping claims; employing lay persons to solicit and refer legal business to himself; and signing his client’s signature to a general release and then, as a notary public, taking the purported acknowledgment of the document’s execution. There were other charges of misconduct that were not sustained by the referee.
After reviewing all of the evidence we are in full agreement with the findings of the special referee. Petitioner’s motion to confirm the special referee’s report is granted, that branch of respondent’s cross motion which seeks to confirm the special referee’s report is granted and the cross motion is otherwise denied.
The respondent is adjudged guilty of serious professional misconduct and should be, and he hereby is, disbarred from the further practice of law. The clerk of this court is directed to strike respondent’s name from the role of attorneys and counselors at law forthwith.
Mollen, P. J., Titone, Lazer, Mangano and Gibbons, JJ., concur.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
99 A.D.2d 152, 472 N.Y.S.2d 9, 1984 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 16532, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-teitler-nyappdiv-1984.