A Lack Of Interest

The New York Appellate Division for the Third Judicial Department underscores the dangers of non-cooperation in responding to a bar complaint by disbarring an attorney for such a lapse after an investigation commenced with a bounced check

the investigation was based upon a check drawn on respondent’s business account having been returned for insufficient funds and AGC’s resulting suspicion that respondent had improperly deposited client funds into that account

Governing law

An attorney who has been suspended on an interim basis pursuant to Rules for Attorney Disciplinary Matters (22 NYCRR) § 1240.9 (b) “and who has failed to respond to or appear for further investigatory or disciplinary proceedings within six months from the date of the order of suspension may be disbarred by the Court without further notice” (see Matter of Basch, 183 AD3d 1224, 1225 [3d Dept 2020]). The record reveals that respondent has ceased cooperating with AGC’s investigation and, since her suspension, has been noncompliant with AGC’s demands concerning a second, unrelated client complaint. AGC has provided respondent with notice of its application to disbar her, although having no obligation to do so (see Rules for Attorney Disciplinary Matters [22 NYCRR] § 1240.9 [b]), and respondent has failed to submit a response to AGC’s instant application, despite seeking and receiving a four-week adjournment, thereby demonstrating her lack of interest in her fate as an attorney in this state. This conclusion is further supported by the fact that respondent is now delinquent in her biennial attorney registration requirements. As such, we grant AGC’s motion and disbar respondent

(Mike Frisch)