IN RE: Richard E. CLARK (2005)

Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Third Department, New York.

IN RE: Richard E. CLARK, an Attorney. Committee on Professional Standards, Petitioner; Richard E. Clark, Respondent.

Decided: March 31, 2005

Before: MERCURE, J.P., CARPINELLO, MUGGLIN, ROSE and LAHTINEN, JJ.

Mark S. Ochs, Committee on Professional Standards, Albany (Michael Philip of counsel), for petitioner. Richard E. Clark, Scottsdale, Arizona, respondent pro se.

Respondent was admitted to practice by this Court in 1977. He maintained an office for the practice of law in Arizona, where he was admitted in 1983. He is currently employed by the Salt River Maricopa Pima Indian Tribe in Arizona.

By judgment and order dated December 1, 2004, the Supreme Court of Arizona found respondent guilty of conduct prejudicial to the administration of justice and imposed certain discipline, which included a censure.

Petitioner moves for an order imposing reciprocal discipline upon respondent (see 22 NYCRR 806.19). Respondent has submitted an affidavit in reply in which he requests that no discipline be imposed.

We grant petitioner's motion and conclude that the ends of justice will be served by imposing the same discipline in this state as was imposed in Arizona, namely a censure.

ORDERED that petitioner's motion is granted; and it is further

ORDERED that respondent is censured.

PER CURIAM.

Was this helpful?

Why was this helpful?

Easy to understand

Solved my problem

Other

Why was this not helpful?

Missing the information I need

Too complicated / too many steps

Out of date

Other

Thank you for your feedback!

Welcome to FindLaw's Cases & Codes

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.

Go To Learn About The Law