In re Quitman
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
Charges by the Association of the Bar of the City of New York against the respondent for fraud and deceit in the proceeding by which he was admitted to practice as an attorney and counselor at law; and (2) for fraudulent practices as an attorney and counselor at law after he was admitted, and for entering into an arrangement with one Hochstadter, who had been convicted of a felony and disbarred therefor, by which Hochstadter in effect practiced law. in the name of the…
Read the full summary
Charges by the Association of the Bar of the City of New York against the respondent for fraud and deceit in the proceeding by which he was admitted to practice as an attorney and counselor at law; and (2) for fraudulent practices as an attorney and counselor at law after he was admitted, and for entering into an arrangement with one Hochstadter, who had been convicted of a felony and disbarred therefor, by which Hochstadter in effect practiced law. in the name of the respondent.
1Opinion of the Court
Ingraham, P. J.:
The very careful and exhaustive report of the referee renders it unnecessary to consider the facts of this case in detail and we .approve his conclusion that the charges have been fully proved. It appears that prior to the 8th of February, 1887, the respondent had been in the employ of Henry M. Góldfogle, an attorney at law, and that on that date the respondent was convicted in the Court of General Sessions for the city and county of ¡New York of having taken and harbored one ¡Kingsburg, a female under the age of sixteen years for the purpose of prostitution, for which he was…
2Cited by2 opinions
- In re KahnAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1972
- In re CarpelAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1917