Legal Opinion

In re Attorneys in Violation of Judiciary Law

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

Decided November 20, 2008Published

1Opinion of the Court

— Per Curiam.

Respondent, who was admitted to practice by this Court in 1995, was suspended by this Court’s order dated January 6, 2005 for failure to comply with the attorney registration requirements of Judiciary Law § 468-a (14 AD3d 788 [2005]).

Respondent now requests reinstatement on the ground that he has complied with the attorney registration requirements of Judiciary Law § 468-a and the Rules of the Chief Administrator of the Courts (see 22 NYCRR part 118). Petitioner does not object to respondent’s application.

Respondent’s application is granted and he is ordered reinstated, effective…

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. In re Attorneys in Violation of Judiciary Law § 468-aAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2005

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

Powered by the Exa API