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: Vincent Dominick PARAGANO, an Attorney. Committee on Professional Standards, Now Known as Attorney Grievance Committee for the Third Judicial Department, Petitioner; v. Vincent Dominick Paragano, Respondent. (Attorney Registration No. 2133957)
DECISION AND ORDER ON MOTION
Respondent was admitted to practice by this Court in 1987, following his 1980 admission in his home state of New Jersey. In 2013, however, as a consequence of his involvement in a fraudulent real estate transaction, respondent was disbarred; first by the Supreme Court of New Jersey, and thereafter by this Court (109 A.D.3d 1045, 971 N.Y.S.2d 580 [3d Dept. 2013]). By February 2, 2023 order, we reinstated respondent to the practice of law in this state subject to certain conditions (213 A.D.3d 1023, 182 N.Y.S.3d 395 [3d Dept. 2023]). Alleging that the conditions of his reinstatement have since been satisfied, respondent, in November 2023, requested, among other things, that the conditions of his reinstatement be deemed satisfied.
Pursuant to the requirements of our February 2, 2023 order, respondent timely provided proof that he underwent an assessment by the Lawyers’ Assistance Program of the New York City Bar Association (hereinafter LAP), which ultimately resulted in a recommendation that he participate in a LAP monitoring agreement, and respondent further timely provided proof that he entered into a risk management services agreement with his counsel. Respondent additionally submitted the written report of Frederick C. Biehl III, who detailed various services and consultations provided to respondent regarding his resumption of the practice of law. Thereafter, in November 2023, respondent provided proof to this Court and to petitioner that he participated in and completed the LAP monitoring agreement. Finally, in January 2024, respondent personally appeared before us, wherein he demonstrated his compliance with the aforementioned conditions and apprised us of his resumption of the practice of law.
Upon our own motion, and upon examination of the papers submitted, we conclude that, under the circumstances presented, we deem each of the conditions of respondent's reinstatement to be satisfied. It is therefore
ORDERED that each condition set forth in this Court's February 2, 2023 Memorandum and Order are hereby deemed satisfied.
Garry, P.J., Aarons, Pritzker, Lynch and Fisher, JJ., 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.
Docket No: PM-09-24
Decided: February 01, 2024
Court: Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Third 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)