Legal Opinion

In re Conine

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

Decided September 25, 1998PublishedCited by 1 opinion

1Per curiam

Respondent was suspended from practice for a period of two years, effective April 1992 (Matter of Conine, 182 AD2d 913). He now applies for reinstatement to practice. Petitioner, the Committee on Professional Standards, opposes the application.

Because we conclude that respondent has not shown by clear and convincing evidence that he possesses the character and general fitness to resume the practice of law (see, 22 NYCRR 806.12 [b]), we deny the application for reinstatement.

Mikoll, J. P., Crew III, White, Yesawich Jr. and Graffeo, JJ., concur. Ordered that respondent’s application for…

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. In re ConineAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1992

3Cited by1 opinion

  1. In re SchechtermanAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2000

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

Powered by the Exa API