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

2025 NY Slip Op 04832

• Court: Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
• Decided: August 28, 2025
• Docket: PM-187-25
• Status: Published

Opinion

Matter of Attorneys in Violation of Judiciary Law § 468-a (Sugihara) (2025 NY Slip Op 04832)

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

2025 NY Slip Op 04832

Decided on August 28, 2025

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 28, 2025

PM-187-25

[*1]In the Matter of Attorneys in Violation of Judiciary Law § 468-a. Attorney Grievance Committee for the Third Judicial Department, Petitioner; Eri Sugihara, Respondent. (Attorney Registration No. 5235148.)

Calendar Date:August 4, 2025
Before:Aarons, J.P., Pritzker, Lynch, Ceresia and Mackey, 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.

Eri Sugihara, Tokyo, Japan, respondent pro se.

Motion by respondent for an order reinstating her to the practice of law following her suspension by October 2021 order of this Court (Matter of Attorneys in Violation of Judiciary Law § 468-a, 198 AD3d 1068, 1086 [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 notice of motion and affidavit with exhibits sworn to April 22, 2025 and the July 28, 2025 responsive correspondence from the Attorney Grievance Committee for the Third Judicial Department, we have 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]). Notwithstanding her satisfaction of the substantive requirements for reinstatement, we direct respondent to (1) demonstrate her completion of 1½ continuing legal education credits in the areas of Skills and/or Law Practice Management (see Rules of App Div, All Depts [22 NYCRR] § 1500.2 [d], [e]) that specifically relate to the practice of law in New York (see Rules of App Div, 3d Dept [22 NYCRR] § 806.16 [c] [5] [i]); and (2) provide proof of her compliance with this condition to both this Court and the Attorney Grievance Committee for the Third Judicial Department within 60 days of this Court's order. Accordingly, 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, subject to the conditions set forth in this decision.

Aarons, J.P., Pritzker, Lynch, Ceresia and Mackey, JJ., concur.