Legal Opinion

In re Haas

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

Decided October 28, 2004PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Per curiam

Respondent was suspended from practice by this Court in January 2004 for a period of three years, nunc pro tunc to May 18, 1998 (Matter of Haas, 3 AD3d 732 [2004]). He now applies for reinstatement. Petitioner opposes the application.

Because we conclude that respondent has not made the showing upon which an application for reinstatement may be granted (see 22 NYCRR 806.12 [b]), we deny his application for reinstatement. We note, for example, that he has not made the restitution to clients required by our decision suspending him from practice and he has not fully reimbursed the Lawyers’ Fund…

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. In re HaasAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2004

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. Attorney Grievance Commission v. HaasCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 2010
  2. In re HaasAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2008

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

Powered by the Exa API