In re Wolk

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

In re Wolk

281 A.D. 289, 119 N.Y.S.2d 334, 1953 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3033

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

DecidedMarch 3, 1953

StatusPublished

This text of 281 A.D. 289 (In re Wolk) 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 Wolk, 281 A.D. 289, 119 N.Y.S.2d 334, 1953 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3033 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1953).

Pincite

Opinion

Per Curiam.

The respondent, an attorney, upon his own admission is guilty of commingling funds, illegal investment of estate funds in two enterprises, and breach of duty as a fiduciary in failing to furnish information concerning the estate, refusing to pay a legacy to a beneficiary until proceedings were commenced to compel an accounting, and issuing checks to the beneficiary, which were dishonored. After a hearing the Referee found the respondent guilty as charged, but concluded that the respondent had apparently inflicted no harm on others. The checks were paid upon notice of dishonor to the respondent. The Referee stressed the fact that the respondent had fully co-operated with those prosecuting the charges and had no wrongful intent to deprive anyone of property to which he was entitled. We are mindful of the matters called to our attention by the Referee, but consider that the respondent’s conduct warrants his suspension for a period of three months.

Does, J. P., Cohn, Callahan, Van Voobhis and Beeitel, JJ., concur.

Respondent suspended for a period of three months.

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

Per Curiam.

The respondent, an attorney, upon his own admission is guilty of commingling funds, illegal investment of estate funds in two enterprises, and breach of duty as a fiduciary in failing to furnish information concerning the estate, refusing to pay a legacy to a beneficiary until proceedings were commenced to compel an accounting, and issuing checks to the beneficiary, which were dishonored. After a hearing the Referee found the respondent guilty as charged, but concluded that the respondent had apparently inflicted no harm on others. The checks were paid upon notice of dishonor to the respondent. The Referee stressed the fact that the respondent had fully co-operated with those prosecuting the charges and had no wrongful intent to deprive anyone of property to which he was entitled. We are mindful of the matters called to our attention by the Referee, but consider that the respondent’s conduct warrants his suspension for a period of three months.

Does, J. P., Cohn, Callahan, Van Voobhis and Beeitel, JJ., concur.

Respondent suspended for a period of three months.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

281 A.D. 289, 119 N.Y.S.2d 334, 1953 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3033, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-wolk-nyappdiv-1953.