In re Van Riper

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

In re Van Riper

303 A.D.2d 902, 755 N.Y.S.2d 904, 2003 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3226

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

DecidedMarch 19, 2003

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 303 A.D.2d 902 (In re Van Riper) 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 Van Riper, 303 A.D.2d 902, 755 N.Y.S.2d 904, 2003 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3226 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2003).

Pincite

Opinion

—Per Curiam.

By decision dated January 2, 2002, respondent was suspended from practice by this Court for a period of one year, effective as of November 30, 2001 (Matter of Van Riper, 290 AD2d 572 [2002]). He now applies for reinstatement.

Our examination of the papers submitted on this application indicates that respondent has substantially complied with the provisions of the order of suspension and with this Court’s rules regarding the conduct of suspended attorneys (see 22 NYCRR 806.9). He has also complied with the requirements of this Court’s rule regarding reinstatement (see 22 NYCRR 806.12). The application is granted and respondent is reinstated to the practice of law, effective immediately.

Mercure, J.P., Peters, Spain, Carpinello and Rose, JJ., concur. Ordered that respondent’s application is granted, and he is reinstated to practice as an attorney and counselor-at-law in the State of New York, effective immediately.

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

—Per Curiam.

By decision dated January 2, 2002, respondent was suspended from practice by this Court for a period of one year, effective as of November 30, 2001 (Matter of Van Riper, 290 AD2d 572 [2002]). He now applies for reinstatement.

Our examination of the papers submitted on this application indicates that respondent has substantially complied with the provisions of the order of suspension and with this Court’s rules regarding the conduct of suspended attorneys (see 22 NYCRR 806.9). He has also complied with the requirements of this Court’s rule regarding reinstatement (see 22 NYCRR 806.12). The application is granted and respondent is reinstated to the practice of law, effective immediately.

Mercure, J.P., Peters, Spain, Carpinello and Rose, JJ., concur. Ordered that respondent’s application is granted, and he is reinstated to practice as an attorney and counselor-at-law in the State of New York, effective immediately.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

303 A.D.2d 902, 755 N.Y.S.2d 904, 2003 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3226, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-van-riper-nyappdiv-2003.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack