IN RE: ANDREW PAUL ZWEBEN (2026)

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER ON MOTION

(Attorney Registration No.1480748)

Calendar Date:  March 2, 2026

Monica A. Duffy, Attorney Grievance Committee for the Third Judicial Department, Albany (Alison M. Coan of counsel), for Attorney Grievance Committee for the Third Judicial Department.

Per Curiam.

We turn, first, to AGC's request for respondent's indefinite suspension due to medical incapacity.  Rules for Attorney Disciplinary Matters (22 NYCRR) § 1240.14(b) authorizes AGC to “apply to the Court for a determination that the respondent is incapacitated from practicing law by reason of mental disability or condition, alcohol or substance abuse, or any other condition that renders the respondent incapacitated from practicing law.”  AGC is not obligated to support an application with medical evidence confirming a respondent's incapacity (see e.g. Matter of O'Phelan, 225 AD3d 1095, 1095 [3d Dept 2024];  Matter of Scharf, 219 AD3d 1602, 1603 [3d Dept 2023];  Matter of Purser, 195 AD3d 1146, 1147 [3d Dept 2021];  Matter of Hall, 171 AD3d 1446, 1447–1448 [3d Dept 2019] ).  However, this Court has generally considered credible evidence with which the Court can be assured that the respondent is medically incapacitated, such as statements from the respondent or the respondent's attorney, correspondence from the respondent's treating physician, correspondence from the respondent's healthcare proxy or power of attorney or a foreign court order premised upon incapacity (see Matter of O'Phelan, 225 AD3d at 1096;  Matter of Scharf, 219 AD3d at 1603;  Matter of Roussin, 208 AD3d 174, 176–177 [1st Dept 2022];  Matter of Purser, 195 AD3d at 1147).  In this case, this Court has only had the opportunity to review two emails from respondent's daughter that were sent to AGC, which suggest that respondent has serious medical issues that may have some impact upon respondent's ability to practice law, but also suggest that it is “crucial” that respondent maintains the ability to engage in the practice of law.¹  Accordingly, the scant record before us supports contradictory but equally plausible inferences concerning respondent's capacity and therefore does not support AGC's request for an indefinite suspension premised on medical incapacity.

Turning to the alternative basis for AGC's motion, “[a] respondent may be suspended from practice on an interim basis during the pendency of an investigation or proceeding ․ upon a finding by the Court that the respondent has engaged in conduct immediately threatening the public interest” (Rules for Atty Disciplinary Matters [22 NYCRR] § 1240.9[a] ).  In this vein, “a respondent's demonstrated failure to cooperate and comply with AGC's lawful demands not only constitutes professional misconduct immediately threatening the public interest, it also clearly jeopardizes the effectiveness of the attorney disciplinary system” (Matter of Figueroa, 241 AD3d 1670, 1671 [3d Dept 2025] [internal quotation marks, brackets and citations omitted] ).  To that end, “the mere failure to comply with a lawful demand of AGC during its investigation is sufficient to form the basis for a suspension” (Matter of Brown, 232 AD3d 981, 982 [3d Dept 2024] [internal quotation marks and citations omitted] ).

Garry, P.J., Aarons, McShan, Powers and Mackey, JJ., concur.

ORDERED that the motion of the Attorney Grievance Committee for the Third Judicial Department is granted in part and denied in part in accordance with the findings set forth in this decision;  and it is further

ORDERED that respondent is suspended from the practice of law, effective immediately, and until further order of this Court (see generally Rules for Atty Disciplinary Matters [22 NYCRR] § 1240.16);  and it is further

ORDERED that respondent shall comply with the provisions of the Rules for Attorney Disciplinary Matters regulating the conduct of suspended attorneys and shall duly certify to the same in his affidavit of compliance (see Rules for Atty Disciplinary Matters [22 NYCRR] § 1240.15);  and it is further

ORDERED that respondent shall, within 30 days of the date of this decision, surrender to the Office of Court Administration any Attorney Secure Pass issued to him;  and it is further

ORDERED that respondent's failure to respond to or appear for further investigatory or disciplinary proceedings within six months from the date of this decision may result in his disbarment by the Court without further notice (see Rules for Atty Disciplinary Matters [22 NYCRR] § 1240.9[b] ).

FOOTNOTES

1.   One email was attached as an exhibit to AGC's motion, and one email was forwarded to this Court by AGC after the filing of its motion.  To date, this Court has not received any correspondence from respondent or respondent's daughter respecting the pending motion.