In re Waite

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

In re Waite

100 A.D.3d 1343, 954 N.Y.S.2d 502

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

DecidedNovember 29, 2012

StatusPublished

This text of 100 A.D.3d 1343 (In re Waite) 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 Waite, 100 A.D.3d 1343, 954 N.Y.S.2d 502 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2012).

Pincite

Opinion

Per Curiam.

Respondent was admitted to practice by this Court in 1979. He maintains an office for the practice of law in the City of Albany.

By decision dated September 15, 2011, this Court suspended respondent from the practice of law for one year, which suspension was conditionally stayed (Matter of Waite, 87 AD3d 1200 [2011]). Respondent now moves for termination of the stayed suspension and provides a supporting affidavit indicating that the condition of the stay has been fully complied with. Petitioner does not oppose the motion, which we now grant.

Peters, EJ., Rose, Kavanagh, McCarthy and Garry, JJ., concur. Ordered that respondent’s motion is granted, and the stayed suspension imposed by this Court’s decision dated September 15, 2011 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 1979. He maintains an office for the practice of law in the City of Albany.

By decision dated September 15, 2011, this Court suspended respondent from the practice of law for one year, which suspension was conditionally stayed (Matter of Waite, 87 AD3d 1200 [2011]). Respondent now moves for termination of the stayed suspension and provides a supporting affidavit indicating that the condition of the stay has been fully complied with. Petitioner does not oppose the motion, which we now grant.

Peters, EJ., Rose, Kavanagh, McCarthy and Garry, JJ., concur. Ordered that respondent’s motion is granted, and the stayed suspension imposed by this Court’s decision dated September 15, 2011 is terminated, effective immediately.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

100 A.D.3d 1343, 954 N.Y.S.2d 502, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-waite-nyappdiv-2012.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack