Drinking While Appearing Remotely

An attorney who had accepted and failed to return unearned fees had engaged in misappropriation warranting disbarment, according to a decision of the New York Appellate Division for the Fourth Judicial Department

We also grant the request of the Grievance Committee for an order directing respondent to make restitution to 11 former clients in the amounts specified in the order entered herewith. We agree with the Grievance Committee that the record establishes that respondent accepted funds from those clients without intending to perform the work for which he was retained or abandoned the clients and converted the funds to his own use. Accordingly, we conclude that respondent wilfully misappropriated or misapplied those funds in the practice of law within the meaning of Judiciary Law § 90 (6-a).

Also

respondent admits that, in March 2023, he appeared remotely before Oswego County Family Court, at which time he was drinking an alcoholic beverage and appeared to be under the influence of alcohol. Respondent admits that he thereafter failed to respond to inquiries from the Grievance Committee regarding the incident.

Sanction

In determining an appropriate sanction, we have considered respondent’s substantial grievance history, which includes three letters of caution and two admonitions issued by the Grievance Committee, as well as a public censure imposed by this Court in 2022 for, inter alia, neglecting a client matter and failing to keep a client informed about the status of a matter (Matter of Fix, 206 AD3d 14, 17 [4th Dept 2022]). We have also considered that the record in this matter establishes that respondent engaged in an extended course of serious misconduct, causing direct harm or substantial prejudice to numerous clients. We have further considered respondent’s failure to cooperate in the grievance investigation or respond to the charges in this matter, which evinces a disregard for his fate as an attorney (see Matter of Shaw, 180 AD3d 1, 4 [4th Dept 2019]). Accordingly, we conclude that respondent should be disbarred.

(Mike Frisch)