Enough For Interim Suspension

The New York Appellate Division for the First Judicial Department has ordered the interim suspension of an attorney who, at the time of alleged misconduct, was a staff attorney with the Corporation Counsel. The allegation do not relate to his official duties. The charges:

The Committee’s motion is based upon complaints filed by Michael DShanabrook, Esq., and Alfonzo Mack. Pursuant to the Shanabrookcomplaint, respondent converted $30,000 that Shanabrook deposited inwhat he believed were respondent’s escrow accounts for a real estatetransaction. The Mack complaint alleged that respondent defrauded himof approximately $200,000 during the course of a real estatetransaction.

Respondent was arrested on June 2, 2009 and charged withseveral felonies related to his activities with respect to the Mackcomplaint and in connection with an unrelated sale of property in BronxCounty. On December 11, 2009,in the Southern District of New York,responded pleaded guilty to two counts of mail fraud arising from hisparticipation in schemes to defraud two clients, one being Mack.

Interim suspension was deemed appropriate:

Immediate suspension on an interim basis is appropriate where theCommittee has presented substantial and uncontested evidence ofintentional conversion or misappropriation of client/third-party fundsby a respondent…

In the instant matter, the Committee is in possession ofsubstantial documentary evidence in the form of bank records and otherdocuments which demonstrates respondent’s misconduct. Indeed,respondent’s failure to contest the motion and his qualified consent tothe Committee’s requested relief, as well as the invocation of his Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination, is in of itself more than sufficient for the requested relief.(citations omitted)

(Mike Frisch)