Legal Opinion

Matter of Attorneys In Violation of Judiciary Law § 468-a. (Verheyden)

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

Decided July 13, 2017PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Per curiam

Respondent was admitted to practice by this Court in 2003 and lists a business address in Uster, Switzerland with the Office of Court Administration. By 2014 order, this Court suspended respondent from the practice of law in New York due to conduct prejudicial to the administration of justice arising from his failure to comply with the attorney registration requirements of Judiciary Law § 468-a and Rules of the Chief Administrator of the Courts (22 NYCRR) § 118.1 (113 AD3d 1020, 1055 [2014]; see Judiciary Law § 468-a [5]; Rules of Professional Conduct [22 NYCRR 1200.0] rule 8.4 [d]). By…

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. Matter of EdelsteinAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2017

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. Matter of Attorneys In Violation of Judiciary Law § 468-a. (Hughes-Hardaway)Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2017
  2. Attorneys in Violation of Judiciary Law § 468-a. Committee on Professional Stds., Now Known as Attorney Grievance Comm. for the Third Jud. Dept., Mark Adam GoldsteinAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2017
  3. In re Attorneys in Violation of Judiciary Law § 468-aAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2017
  4. In re Attorneys in Violation of Judiciary Law § 468-aAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2017
  5. In re Attorneys in Violation of Judiciary Law § 468-aAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2017

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

Powered by the Exa API