Learn About the Law
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
IN RE: Richard J. KURTZ a/k/a Richard Joseph Kurtz (admitted as Joseph Kurtz), an attorney and counselor-at-law. Departmental Disciplinary Committee for the First Judicial Department, Petitioner, Richard J. Kurtz, Esq., Respondent.
Respondent Richard J. Kurtz was admitted to the practice of law by the Second Judicial Department on June 19, 1963, as Joseph Kurtz. At all times relevant to this proceeding, respondent maintained an office for the practice of law within the First Judicial Department.
Respondent was indicted, on November 20, 1998, in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York, for bankruptcy fraud in violation of 18 USC 152, arising out of his 1993 filing of a sworn petition for bankruptcy wherein he concealed substantial assets owned by him. The indictment also charged respondent with bankruptcy perjury in connection with his oath before a bankruptcy trustee as to the truthfulness of his statements in the petition. On July 13, 1999, respondent pleaded guilty to bankruptcy fraud under the second count of the indictment. That count alleged that he fraudulently concealed assets in a sworn examination before the bankruptcy trustee, and that he falsely swore that the bankruptcy petition was correct.
The Departmental Disciplinary Committee now moves for an order striking respondent's name from the roll of attorneys pursuant to Judiciary Law § 90(4)(b). Since these offenses are essentially similar to the New York felonies of offering a false instrument for filing in the first degree (Penal Law 175.35) as well as perjury in the first degree (Penal Law 210.15), his conviction warrants automatic disbarment as of the date of the conviction (Matter of Frankel, 189 A.D.2d 261, 596 N.Y.S.2d 59).
Accordingly, the petition to strike respondent's name from the roll of attorneys should be granted.
Respondent's name stricken from the roll of attorneys and counselors-at-law in the State of New York, as indicated.
PER CURIAM
All concur.
Thank you for your feedback!
A free source of state and federal court opinions, state laws, and the United States Code. For more information about the legal concepts addressed by these cases and statutes visit FindLaw's Learn About the Law.
Decided: November 09, 1999
Court: Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department, New York.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)
Harness the power of our directory with your own profile. Select the button below to sign up.
Learn more about FindLaw’s newsletters, including our terms of use and privacy policy.
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)