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: Michael L. MILLER, Esq. a/k/a Michael Lewis Miller (admitted as Michael Miller), an attorney and counselor-at-law. Departmental Disciplinary Committee for the First Judicial Department, Petitioner, Michael L. Miller, Esq., Respondent.
Respondent Michael Miller was admitted to the practice of law in the State of New York by the Second Judicial Department on March 13, 1968. At all times relevant to this proceeding, he maintained an office for the practice of law in the First Judicial Department.
On January 22, 1998, respondent was convicted in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania after a jury trial of conspiracy to commit wire and security fraud (18 U.S.C. § 371), wire fraud (18 U.S.C. § 1343), and fraud in the offer and sale of stock (15 U.S.C. § 77q [a] ), for which he was sentenced on January 27, 1998 to seven months incarceration followed by three years supervised release and a $10,000 fine.
By petition dated April 6, 1998, the Departmental Disciplinary Committee seeks an order striking respondent's name from the roll of attorneys pursuant to Judiciary Law § 90(4)(b). Insofar as the Federal charges are substantially similar to a New York felony under the New York insider trading statute (General Business Law 352-c[5][6]; Matter of Glauberman, 181 A.D.2d 207, 586 N.Y.S.2d 601), that conviction subjects respondent to automatic disbarment (Judiciary Law 90[4][e] ). Since the pendency of respondent's appeal of his conviction is not a basis to delay any action (22 NYCRR 603.12 [e]; Matter of Mitchell, 40 N.Y.2d 153, 157, 386 N.Y.S.2d 95, 351 N.E.2d 743), and any disciplinary sanction may be revoked in the event of a successful appeal by respondent (Judiciary Law 90[5][a] ), his request to adjourn the present proceedings pending disposition of his appeal by the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit is denied.
Accordingly, insofar as respondent ceased to be an attorney upon his felony conviction, the petition to strike his name from the roll of attorneys is granted.
PER CURIAM.
All concur.
Thank you for your feedback!
As the largest network of trusted legal brands, we help firms build authority across the platforms consumers and AI systems rely on most. Our network helps attorneys strengthen visibility, credibility, and preference where legal decisions begin.
Decided: July 16, 1998
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)