In re Winsor

84 A.D.3d 1585, 922 N.Y.S.2d 817
Procedural entryThis page is a short order in In re Winsor. Read the opinion of the Court — 66 A.D.3d 1324

Opinion

Per Curiam.

Respondent was admitted to practice by this Court in 1982 and maintains an office for the practice of law in the Town of Edmeston, Otsego County.

Having granted a motion by petitioner for an order declaring that no issues are raised by the pleadings herein and having reviewed respondent’s submissions in mitigation (see 22 NYCRR 806.5), we now find respondent guilty of professional misconduct as charged and specified in the petition. Respondent neglected a legal matter, failed to respond to the clients’ communications, and misled the clients as to the status of their matter, in violation of the former Code of Professional Responsibility and the [1586]*1586Rules of Professional Conduct (see former Code of Professional Responsibility DR 6-101 [a] [3] [22 NYCRR 1200.30 (a) (3)]; Rules of Professional Conduct [22 NYCRR 1200.0] rule 1.3 [b]; rule 8.4 [c], [d], [h]; rule 1.4).

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

In re Winsor, 84 A.D.3d 1585, 922 N.Y.S.2d 817 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2011).

84 A.D.3d 1585 (In re Winsor) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

In re Winsor
66 A.D.3d 1324 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2009)
In re Winsor
183 A.D.2d 936 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1992)
In re Winsor
192 A.D.2d 867 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1993)
In re Winsor
242 A.D.2d 828 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1997)
In re Winsor
275 A.D.2d 858 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2000)