Legal Opinion
In re Ropiecki
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
Decided November 13, 1935PublishedCited by 8 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtEdgcomb, J.
This is a disciplinary proceeding. Respondent has been charged with converting to his own use money which belonged to his clients, and which was turned over to him for a specific purpose. We regret to say that we are forced to the conclusion that he is guilty of the accusations made against him.
A disciplinary proceeding is in no sense a criminal one, and *81the statutory rules relating to the presumption of innocence and the burden of establishing the respondent’s guilt beyond a reasonable doubt do not apply. (Matter of Randel, 158 N. Y. 216; Matter of Spenser, 143 App. Div. 229, 236; affd., 203…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Charges of Association of the Bar v. RandelNew York Court of Appeals · 1899
- In re BabcockAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1930
- In re spenserAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1911
- In re PowersAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1932
- In re BauderAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1908
3Cited by8 opinions
- In Re NovoSupreme Court of Louisiana · 1942
- In re MaloneAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1984
- In re MahonAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1962
- In re PeltzAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1965
- In re CrittendenAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1938
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.