In re Rose

OPINION OF THE COURT

The petitioner served the respondent with a petition dated June 26, 2000, containing one charge of professional misconduct. After a hearing on February 15, 2001, at which the respondent failed to appear, the Special Referee sustained the charge. The petitioner now moves to confirm the report of the Special Referee and to impose such discipline upon the respondent as the Court deems appropriate. The respondent has neither cross-moved nor submitted any papers in reply to the petitioner’s motion.

The charge alleges that the respondent engaged in improper conduct involving…