Legal Opinion

In re Weinheimer

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

Decided October 27, 2011PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Per curiam

*1246Petitioner charges respondent with having converted funds on behalf of a client. The matter was referred to a Referee for a hearing and report (see 22 NYCRR 806.5). We confirm the Referee’s report insofar as it did not sustain the charge of conversion in violation of former Code of Professional Responsibility DR 1-102 (a) (4) and DR 9-102 (c) (4) (22 NYCRR 1200.3 [a] [4]; 1200.46 [c] [4]) and Rules of Professional Conduct (22 NYCRR 1200.0) rules 8.4 (c) and 1.15 (c),* because we agree with the Referee that respondent’s misconduct was not motivated by larcenous intent (see e.g. Matter of…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. In re JosephAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1996
  2. In re MillerAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1994
  3. In re SwyerAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1988
  4. In re NewbouldAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2000

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. In re WeinheimerAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2013
  2. In re WeinheimerAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2013

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

Powered by the Exa API