Matter of Attorneys in Violation of Judiciary Law § 468-a (Won Jun Cho)

2023 NY Slip Op 04483

• Court: Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
• Decided: September 7, 2023
• Docket: PM-201-23
• Status: Published

Opinion

Matter of Attorneys in Violation of Judiciary Law § 468-a (Won Jun Cho) (2023 NY Slip Op 04483)

Matter of Attorneys in Violation of Judiciary Law § 468-a (Won Jun Cho)

2023 NY Slip Op 04483

Decided on September 7, 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:September 7, 2023

PM-201-23

[*1]In the Matter of Attorneys in Violation of Judiciary Law § 468-a. Attorney Grievance Committee for the Third Judicial Department, Petitioner; Won Jun Cho, Respondent. (Attorney Registration No. 4492229.)

Calendar Date:July 17, 2023
Before:Garry, P.J., Aarons, Reynolds Fitzgerald, Fisher and McShan, JJ., concur.

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

Won Jun Cho, Seoul, South Korea, respondent pro se.

Motion by respondent for an order reinstating him to the practice of law following his suspension by May 2019 order of this Court (Matter of Attorneys in Violation of Judiciary Law § 468-a, 172 AD3d 1706, 1716 [3d Dept 2019]; 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 31, 2023 and the July 13, 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 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., Aarons, Reynolds Fitzgerald, Fisher and McShan, JJ., concur.