Representing Relatives

Reciprocal discipline was imposed by the New York Appellate Division for the Second Judicial Department based on a six-month suspension from New Jersey. The attorney fought reciprocal discipline, alleging an infirmity of proof and complaining about the length of time between the misconduct and the New York discipline. The charges arose out of the attorney’s representation of her 91 year old grandmother:

The respondent’s testimony was devoted largely to background factsgiving rise to the multiple court proceedings which took placepertaining to various family-owned companies and/or properties. Therespondent attempted to show that the litigation was the product ofintense intra-family disputes and that her New Jersey suspension wasthe outgrowth of that litigation. The respondent also, over objection,delved into the duration of the New Jersey grievance proceedings, whichwere commenced in 1997. She attempted to show that because thecomplaint had been hanging over her head for so long (i.e., 10 years),reciprocal discipline should not be imposed by this Court. In thealternative, the respondent attempted to show that the delay prejudicedher case. With regard to the respondent’s defense that the impositionof reciprocal discipline by this Court would be unjust, she relied onthe fact that the DEC had recommended only a reprimand, that she hadalready been reinstated in New Jersey, that she had paid all herattorney registration fees in New York and New Jersey, and that she wascurrent, as well, with her Continuing Legal Education requirements.

As Alan has noted, representing relatives has its own special dangers. The attorney also had been convicted of 12 counts of failure to provide sustenance in violation of Agriculture and Markets Act Section 353, an unclassified  misdemeanor. The disciplinary charges relating to the conviction were held in abeyance pending the outcome of the reciprocal matter. (Mike Frisch)