Matter of Attorneys in Violation of Judiciary Law ? 468-a (Iwase)

2024 NY Slip Op 06270

• Court: Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
• Decided: December 12, 2024
• Docket: PM-249-24
• Status: Published

Opinion

Matter of Attorneys in Violation of Judiciary Law § 468-a (Iwase) (2024 NY Slip Op 06270)

Matter of Attorneys in Violation of Judiciary Law § 468-a (Iwase)

2024 NY Slip Op 06270

Decided on December 12, 2024

Appellate Division, Third Department

Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law § 431.

This opinion is uncorrected and subject to revision before publication in the Official Reports.

Decided and Entered:December 12, 2024

PM-249-24

[*1]In the Matter of Attorneys in Violation of Judiciary Law § 468-a. Committee on Professional Standards, Now Known as Attorney Grievance Committee for the Third Judicial Department, Petitioner; Yoshikazu Iwase, Respondent. (Attorney Registration No. 4215034.)

Calendar Date:November 12, 2024
Before:Garry, P.J., Egan Jr., Reynolds Fitzgerald, McShan and Powers, JJ., concur.

Monica A. Duffy, Attorney Grievance Committee for the Third Judicial Department, Albany (Alison M. Coan of counsel), for petitioner.

Yoshikazu Iwase, Tokyo, Japan, respondent pro se.

Motion by respondent for an order reinstating him to the practice of law following his suspension by January 2014 order of this Court (Matter of Attorneys in Violation of Judiciary Law § 468-a, 113 AD3d 1020, 1036 [3d Dept 2014]; see Rules for Atty Disciplinary Matters [22 NYCRR] § 1240.16; Rules of App Div, 3d Dept [22 NYCRR] § 806.16).

Upon reading respondent's notice of motion and affidavit with exhibits sworn to July 23, 2024 and the November 6, 2024 responsive correspondence from the Attorney Grievance Committee for the Third Judicial Department, and having determined, by clear and convincing evidence, that (1) respondent has complied with the order of suspension and the rules of this Court, (2) respondent has the requisite character and fitness to practice law, and (3) it would be in the public interest to reinstate respondent to the practice of law (see Rules for Atty Disciplinary Matters [22 NYCRR] § 1240.16 [a]),^[FN1] it is

ORDERED that respondent's motion for reinstatement is granted; and it is further

ORDERED that respondent is reinstated as an attorney and counselor-at-law, effective immediately.

Garry, P.J., Egan Jr., Reynolds Fitzgerald, McShan and Powers, JJ., concur.

Footnotes

Footnote 1: In light of respondent's provision of proof of his satisfactory passage of the Multistate Professional Responsibility Exam, among other things, we excuse his noncompliance with Rules of the Appellate Division, Third Department (22 NYCRR) § 806.16 (c) (5) (i) (see Matter of Attorneys in Violation of Judiciary Law § 468-a [Plant], 226 AD3d 1300, 1301 n [3d Dept 2024]).