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

2023 NY Slip Op 04409

• Court: Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
• Decided: August 24, 2023
• Docket: PM-191-23
• Status: Published

Opinion

Matter of Attorneys in Violation of Judiciary Law § 468-a (Paik) (2023 NY Slip Op 04409)

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

2023 NY Slip Op 04409

Decided on August 24, 2023

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:August 24, 2023

PM-191-23

[*1]In the Matter of Attorneys in Violation of Judiciary Law § 468-a. Attorney Grievance Committee for the Third Judicial Department, Petitioner; Son-U Paik, Also Known As Michael Paik, Respondent. (Attorney Registration No. 3028446.)

Calendar Date:June 5, 2023
Before:Garry, P.J., Lynch, Aarons, Reynolds Fitzgerald and Fisher, JJ., concur.

Monica A. Duffy, Attorney Grievance Committee for the Third Judicial Department, Albany, for Attorney Grievance Committee for the Third Judicial Department.

Tesser, Ryan & Rochman, LLP, White Plains (Randall Tesser of counsel), for respondent.

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, 1046 [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 May 1, 2023 and the June 1, 2023 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]), 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., Lynch, Aarons, Reynolds Fitzgerald and Fisher, JJ., concur.