Legal Opinion

In re Tang

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

Decided October 9, 2008PublishedCited by 7 opinions

1Per curiam

Respondent was admitted to practice by this Court in 1985. She previously maintained an office for the practice of law in Albany County.

Respondent has not answered or otherwise replied to a petition of charges or to petitioner’s instant motion for a default judgment, both of which were personally served upon her. In support of its motion, petitioner has filed proof by affidavit of the facts constituting the alleged misconduct. Under the circumstances presented, respondent is deemed to have admitted the charges and we grant petitioner’s motion (see Matter of Crumb, 50 AD3d 1310 [2008]; Matter…

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. In re PetrolawiczAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1996

3Cited by7 opinions

  1. In re DaytonAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2012
  2. In re PerryAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2011
  3. In re AndersonAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2011
  4. In re CourtneyAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2014
  5. In re CourtneyAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2014

2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API