Legal Opinion

In re Nagoda

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

Decided February 8, 2000Published

1Per curiam

Respondent, who was admitted by this Court in 1986 and resides in Forestburgh, Sullivan County, is currently suspended from practice (254 AD2d 517).

Upon respondent’s failure to answer a petition of charges, the Committee on Professional Standards moves for a default *665judgment. Both the petition and the motion have been personally served upon respondent. The motion is supported by documentary proof of the charged professional misconduct. Respondent has submitted an affirmation in mitigation. Under the circumstances presented, respondent is deemed to have admitted the charges and specifications…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. In re PetrolawiczAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1996
  2. In re NagodaAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1997
  3. In re NagodaAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1998
  4. In re NagodaAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1998

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

Powered by the Exa API