In re Parise

The respondent was admitted to practice by this court on April 6, 1956. In this proceeding to discipline him for professional misconduct, the petitioner moves to confirm the report of the Justice of the Supreme Court to whom the issues were referred for hearing and report.

Since the respondent could not with due diligence be served personally, this court directed that he be served by substituted service. Service was made as directed by the court and the respondent thereafter failed to appear or answer in this proceeding.

*273The reporting Justice has found the respondent guilty of neglecting the…