Matter of Attorneys In Violation of Judiciary Law § 468-a and 22 NYCRR 118.1, Attorney Grievance Comms. for The Fourth Jud. Dept.

2017 NY Slip Op 4749, 152 A.D.3d 23, 57 N.Y.S.3d 306
CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
DecidedJune 9, 2017
Docket1290/16 CA 16-00578
StatusPublished

This text of 2017 NY Slip Op 4749 (Matter of Attorneys In Violation of Judiciary Law § 468-a and 22 NYCRR 118.1, Attorney Grievance Comms. for The Fourth Jud. Dept.) 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
Matter of Attorneys In Violation of Judiciary Law § 468-a and 22 NYCRR 118.1, Attorney Grievance Comms. for The Fourth Jud. Dept., 2017 NY Slip Op 4749, 152 A.D.3d 23, 57 N.Y.S.3d 306 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2017).

Opinion

OPINION OF THE COURT

Per Curiam.

*24 In December 2016, the Grievance Committees applied to this Court for an order directing the respondents named on the attached list to show cause why they should not be suspended from the practice of law on the grounds that they violated Judiciary Law § 468-a and 22 NYCRR 118.1 by failing to comply with attorney registration requirements, and that they failed to respond to numerous written inquiries from the Office of Court Administration and the Grievance Committees concerning their delinquency. By order entered December 27, 2016, this Court directed respondents to show cause in writing on or before March 1, 2017, why they should not be suspended for failing to comply with attorney registration requirements. Respondents either failed to respond in any fashion to the show cause order or otherwise failed to show cause why they should not be suspended.

The failure to comply with attorney registration requirements violates Judiciary Law § 468-a and 22 NYCRR 118.1 and constitutes conduct prejudicial to the administration of justice warranting the imposition of discipline (see Matter of Attorneys in Violation of Judiciary Law § 468-a, 54 AD3d 9, 10 [2008]). Accordingly, we conclude that the respondents named on the attached list should be suspended until further order of this Court.

[[Image here]]

*25 [[Image here]]

*26 [[Image here]]

Smith, J.P., Carni, DeJoseph, NeMoyer and Troutman, JJ., concur.

Order of suspension entered.

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

Related

In re Attorneys in Violation of Judiciary Law
54 A.D.3d 9 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2008)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
2017 NY Slip Op 4749, 152 A.D.3d 23, 57 N.Y.S.3d 306, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/matter-of-attorneys-in-violation-of-judiciary-law-468-a-and-22-nycrr-nyappdiv-2017.