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

2024 NY Slip Op 06271

• Court: Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
• Decided: December 12, 2024
• Docket: PM-250-24
• Status: Published

Opinion

Matter of Attorneys in Violation of Judiciary Law § 468-a (Reichel) (2024 NY Slip Op 06271)

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

2024 NY Slip Op 06271

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-250-24

[*1]In the Matter of Attorneys in Violation of Judiciary Law § 468-a. Attorney Grievance Committee for the Third Judicial Department, Petitioner; Mark Christopher Reichel, Respondent. (Attorney Registration No. 4152401.)

Calendar Date:November 25, 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 Attorney Grievance Committee for the Third Judicial Department.

Mark Christopher Reichel, Indianapolis, Indiana, respondent pro se.

Motion by respondent for an order reinstating him to the practice of law following his suspension by October 2021 order of this Court (Matter of Attorneys in Violation of Judiciary Law § 468-a, 198 AD3d 1068, 1084 [3d Dept 2021]; see Rules for Atty Disciplinary Matters [22 NYCRR] § 1240.16; Rules of App Div, 3d Dept [22 NYCRR] § 806.16).

Upon reading respondent's affidavit with exhibits sworn to October 22, 2024, respondent's supplemental affidavit with exhibits sworn to October 31, 2024 and the November 18, 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 satisfied the requirements of Rules of the Appellate Division, Third Department (22 NYCRR) § 806.16 (c) (5); (2) respondent has complied with the order of suspension and the rules of this Court, (3) respondent has the requisite character and fitness to practice law, and (4) 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., Egan Jr., Reynolds Fitzgerald, McShan and Powers, JJ., concur.