A Long And Ugly History

The New York Appellate Division for the Second Judicial Department has disbarred an attorney

The respondent admitted to misappropriating approximately $600,000 in client and third-party funds over a period of more than three years. This figure included the checks identified in charge 1, the majority of which were payments made to satisfy the respondent’s personal debts. With regard to the fabricated settlements, the respondent testified that he misrepresented the existence of the settlements rather than “having to deal with motion practice,” or where complications arose in his cases for various reasons, including his own failure to fulfill his basic responsibilities, such as deposit a down payment or commence a legal action. In the case of charge 5, the respondent stated that he had “settled” with his client for more than the opposing party was willing to pay, but the respondent never took steps to obtain even the lesser amount that the opposing party had offered.

The respondent explained that he failed to follow the firm’s protocol in providing the firm’s bookkeeper with documentation when he deposited or withdrew funds from the attorney trust accounts in order to conceal his misappropriations and avoid questions from the firm’s partners or its bookkeeper. However, the respondent’s misconduct was eventually uncovered, and he was terminated from the firm, after the firm was contacted regarding insufficient funds in the Investors and Chase accounts in or about February 2020. The respondent admitted that he initially told the firm’s managing partner that the insufficient funds were due to the respondent’s failure to make a $132,000 deposit. Later, when a transfer made by the managing partner in this amount did not resolve the issue, the respondent provided a story regarding a small part of his misconduct, which was “not wholly true,” in order to “kick that proverbial can down the road.” Upon the firm’s receipt of an insufficient funds notice regarding the Chase account, the respondent then met with the bookkeeper and attempted to transfer funds from one account to another to cover the related shortfall. At this point, the managing partner confronted the respondent and, over the following weeks, the respondent explained the extent of his misconduct to the firm’s partners. The respondent further testified that he had reimbursed the firm for all of the funds that he misappropriated, through cashing in his 401(k) account and with the help of his parents.

According to the respondent’s testimony, his misappropriations were related to his “long and ugly history” with compulsive gambling, beginning in elementary school with football tickets and continuing until about May 2020. The respondent testified that in 2016, his compulsion became more debilitating and he gambled more frequently, with larger sums of money. The December 11, 2024 respondent explained that, when he should have been working, his thoughts were consumed by gambling, and he began to abuse alcohol. According to the respondent, his compulsive nature clouded his reasoning such that he believed it was better to hide his mistakes in order to conceal the extent of his misconduct, which led him to use client and third-party funds held by the firm to cover his debts and to pay personal expenses. The respondent and his therapist, whom the respondent has seen nearly every week since May 2020, both reported that the respondent had not gambled since beginning therapy, due to the firm’s discovery of the respondent’s misappropriations and the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic, which brought sports gambling to a temporary halt. The therapist’s evaluation of the respondent revealed diagnoses of alcoholism and persistent and severe compulsive gambling. It should be noted, however, that the respondent admitted that he used the $4,000 cash disbursement from the Investors account to pay a friend’s financial obligation.

Sanction

By engaging in this misconduct, the respondent exhibited a complete disregard for his fiduciary duties.

Under the totality of the circumstances, we find that disbarment is warranted.

(Mike Frisch)