Legal Opinion

In re Attorneys in Violation of Judiciary Law § 468-a

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

Decided January 8, 2004PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Per curiam

Petitioner moves to suspend respondent attorneys on the ground that they have failed to file a registration statement and pay the required at*663torney registration fee in accordance with Judiciary Law § 468-a and part 118 of the Rules of the Chief Administrator of the Courts (22 NYCRR part 118).

The moving papers indicate that despite written notices sent to them by the Office of Court Administration and a notice sent by petitioner, respondents have failed to register and pay the required fee. They have also failed to respond to the instant motion.

Judiciary Law § 468-a (5) provides that…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. In re FarleyAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1994
  2. In re RyanAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1997
  3. In re Attorneys in Violation of Judiciary Law § 468-aAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2002

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. In re Attorneys in Violation of Judiciary Law § 468-aAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2005
  2. In re Violation of Attorneys Judiciary Law § 468-AAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2008
  3. Matter of GelleneAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2026

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

Powered by the Exa API