Matter of Azzoline

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Matter of Azzoline

132 A.D.3d 185, 18 N.Y.S.3d 525

CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

DecidedSeptember 15, 2015

DocketM-2785

StatusPublished

This text of 132 A.D.3d 185 (Matter of Azzoline) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Matter of Azzoline, 132 A.D.3d 185, 18 N.Y.S.3d 525 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2015).

Pincite

Opinion

OPINION OF THE COURT

Per Curiam.

Respondent Salvatore V. Azzoline was admitted to the practice of law in the State of New York by the Second Judicial Department on April 26, 1995 under the name Salvatore Vincent Azzoline. At all times relevant to this proceeding, respondent maintained an office for the practice of law within the First Judicial Department.

This Court immediately suspended respondent from the practice of law effective November 25, 2014 (2014 NY Slip Op 90904[U]) for his willful failure to cooperate with the Departmental Disciplinary Committee’s investigation. Respondent failed to answer complaints or appear for deposition regarding his misrepresentation of the status of several pending matters to his former law firm and his failure to apprise a former client of the status of an action of her deceased father.

The Committee now seeks an order disbarring respondent on the ground that he has been suspended pursuant to Rules of the Appellate Division, First Department (22 NYCRR) § 603.4 (e) (1) (i) and has failed to appear or apply in writing for a hearing or reinstatement for a period of six months after the date of the interim suspension, as provided in 22 NYCRR 603.4 (g). Nor has respondent filed with this Court, in compliance with 22 NYCRR 603.13 (f), either proof that he notified his clients of the suspension and his inability to act as an attorney or a statement of address to which communications may be directed.

Accordingly, inasmuch as more than six months have elapsed since the date of this Court’s interim suspension order and respondent has neither appeared nor applied in writing to the Committee or this Court for a hearing or reinstatement, the Committee’s motion for an order disbarring respondent pursuant to 22 NYCRR 603.4 (g) should be granted, and respondent’s name stricken from the roll of attorneys and counselors-at-law in the State of New York, effective immediately (Matter of Fletcher, 70 AD3d 63 [1st Dept 2009]; Matter of Kennedy, 55 *187 AD3d 169 [1st Dept 2008]; Matter of Ryans, 46 AD3d 71 [1st Dept 2007]).

Tom, J.P., Sweeny, Andrias, Moskowitz and Gische, JJ., concur.

Respondent disbarred, and his name stricken from the roll of attorneys and counselors-at-law in the State of New York, effective the date hereof.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

OPINION OF THE COURT

Per Curiam.

Respondent Salvatore V. Azzoline was admitted to the practice of law in the State of New York by the Second Judicial Department on April 26, 1995 under the name Salvatore Vincent Azzoline. At all times relevant to this proceeding, respondent maintained an office for the practice of law within the First Judicial Department.

This Court immediately suspended respondent from the practice of law effective November 25, 2014 (2014 NY Slip Op 90904[U]) for his willful failure to cooperate with the Departmental Disciplinary Committee’s investigation. Respondent failed to answer complaints or appear for deposition regarding his misrepresentation of the status of several pending matters to his former law firm and his failure to apprise a former client of the status of an action of her deceased father.

The Committee now seeks an order disbarring respondent on the ground that he has been suspended pursuant to Rules of the Appellate Division, First Department (22 NYCRR) § 603.4 (e) (1) (i) and has failed to appear or apply in writing for a hearing or reinstatement for a period of six months after the date of the interim suspension, as provided in 22 NYCRR 603.4 (g). Nor has respondent filed with this Court, in compliance with 22 NYCRR 603.13 (f), either proof that he notified his clients of the suspension and his inability to act as an attorney or a statement of address to which communications may be directed.

Accordingly, inasmuch as more than six months have elapsed since the date of this Court’s interim suspension order and respondent has neither appeared nor applied in writing to the Committee or this Court for a hearing or reinstatement, the Committee’s motion for an order disbarring respondent pursuant to 22 NYCRR 603.4 (g) should be granted, and respondent’s name stricken from the roll of attorneys and counselors-at-law in the State of New York, effective immediately (Matter of Fletcher, 70 AD3d 63 [1st Dept 2009]; Matter of Kennedy, 55 *187 AD3d 169 [1st Dept 2008]; Matter of Ryans, 46 AD3d 71 [1st Dept 2007]).

Tom, J.P., Sweeny, Andrias, Moskowitz and Gische, JJ., concur.

Respondent disbarred, and his name stricken from the roll of attorneys and counselors-at-law in the State of New York, effective the date hereof.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

132 A.D.3d 185, 18 N.Y.S.3d 525, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/matter-of-azzoline-nyappdiv-2015.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack