Duty To Cooperate Taken Seriously In New York

The disciplinary system is New York is unique in its sanction regime for attorneys who fail to fully answer a bar complaint and participate in the process.

Disbarment has been imposed by the Appellate Division for the Third Judicial Department for such conduct

Respondent was admitted to practice by this Court in 2006 and last maintained a law office in the Town of Niskayuna, Schenectady County. In May 2023, the Attorney Grievance Committee for the Third Judicial Department (hereinafter AGC) commenced an investigation of a client’s complaint alleging that respondent had neglected an appeal of a criminal matter arising in Schenectady City Court, resulting in dismissal of the appeal by the Schenectady County Court. Although respondent initially responded to the complaint, he thereafter failed to respond to AGC’s subsequent requests for information and did not appear for an examination under oath. AGC thereafter moved for respondent’s interim suspension, and in June 2024 we suspended respondent pending AGC’s investigation (228 AD3d 1055 [3d Dept 2024]). Citing respondent’s continued failure to respond to or appear for further investigatory or disciplinary proceedings within six months from the date of the order of suspension, AGC now moves for respondent’s disbarment. Respondent has not supplied a response to the motion to date.

Discipline

given these facts, and in an effort to protect the public interest (see Rules for Atty Disciplinary Matters [22 NYCRR] § 1240.9 [a]), we grant AGC’s motion and disbar respondent (see e.g. Matter of Cohen, 217 AD3d at 1249; Matter of Croak, 156 AD3d at 1112

Neglect of a single appeal would normally result in a far lesser sanction. (Mike Frisch)