Reinstated And Resigned

The New York Appellate Division for the Third Judicial Department granted a suspended attorneys request to be reinstatement and accepted her resignation.

In March 2017, respondent was suspended from the practice of law for one year by the Supreme Court of California, with the execution of such suspension stayed for all but the first 30 days. Respondent’s suspension arose from sustained allegations that she had engaged in misleading conduct in connection with her application for counsel fees in a class action, and had disregarded two separate court orders.

As a consequence a three-month reciprocal suspension was imposed .

Respondent now moves for, in succession, her reinstatement (see Rules for Attorney Disciplinary Matters [22 NYCRR] § 1240.16; Rules of App Div, 3d Dept [22 NYCRR] § 806.16 [a]) and for leave to resign for nondisciplinary reasons.

Now

Notably, having been suspended by this Court for a three month period, respondent was initially entitled to avail herself of the less onerous forms and procedures applicable to attorneys suspended for a period of less than six months (see Matter of Jing Tan, 164 AD3d 1515, 1517-1518 [2018]). Owing to her delay in moving for her reinstatement, however, respondent must now meet the procedural requirements for those attorneys serving suspensions greater than six months, which, among other things, requires that she submit proof that she successfully passed the Multistate Professional Responsibility Examination (hereinafter MPRE) within one year of the date of her motion for reinstatement (see Matter of Attorneys in Violation of Judiciary Law § 468-a [Nenninger], 180 AD3d 1317, 1317-1318 [2020]; Rules for Attorney Disciplinary Matters [22 NYCRR] § 1240.16 [b]). However, as part of her motion, respondent asks this Court to waive the MPRE requirement, contending, in part, that her simultaneous request for resignation obviates the need for additional ethical retraining.

The court

a waiver request justified solely by a simultaneous request to resign will likely not suffice in most instances where an attorney seeks reinstatement from a suspension that resulted from significant misconduct.

Notwithstanding these concerns, respondent provides several additional facts supportive of her waiver request…

These facts include her passing the MPRE in 2018 and courses in continuing education

Based upon the totality of circumstances related to her waiver request, we find that a waiver of the MPRE requirement is warranted and proceed to our assessment of the remainder of her application.

On the merits, the court grants reinstatement 

Turning to that part of respondent’s application seeking leave to resign for nondisciplinary reasons, we find no impediment to the relief sought. We therefore grant respondent’s motion in its entirety, reinstate her to the practice of law and immediately grant her application for nondisciplinary resignation.

(Mike Frisch)