IN RE: TRINA TRINHTHI CHU (2026)

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER ON MOTION

(Attorney Registration No. 3057411)

Calendar Date:  May 18, 2026

Monica A. Duffy, Attorney Grievance Committee for the Third Judicial Department, Albany (Michael K. Creaser of counsel), for Attorney Grievance Committee for the Third Judicial Department.

Per Curiam.

At the outset, we note that AGC's motion does not make its request for relief in the alternative (see e.g. Matter of Singh, 245 AD3d 1061, 1062 [3d Dept 2026] ), but rather merely argues that respondent's established professional misconduct, as well as her criminal matter in Louisiana (see Rules for Atty Disciplinary Matters [22 NYCRR] § 1240.12[c][2][i] ), warrants the imposition of discipline in this state.  As to respondent's criminal matter, AGC urges that that respondent's conviction in Louisiana for the misdemeanor of offenses against intellectual property constitutes a serious crime in New York. A “serious crime” is defined as “any criminal offense denominated a felony under the laws of any state ․ which does not constitute a felony under the laws of this state, and ․ a necessary element of which, as determined by statutory or common law definition of such crime, includes interference with the administration of justice, false swearing, misrepresentation, fraud, ․ deceit, bribery, extortion, misappropriation, theft, or an attempt or conspiracy or solicitation of another to commit a serious crime” (Judiciary Law § 90[4][d] ).

Turning to the portion of AGC's motion seeking the imposition of discipline on respondent based on her established professional misconduct in Louisiana, AGC argues that the disciplinary proceeding in Louisiana established that respondent had violated four Rules of Professional Conduct, which are identical or substantially similar to New York's applicable Rules (see Rules of Prof Conduct [22 NYCRR 1200.0] rules 8.4[a], [b], [c], [d] ).  As respondent has not submitted a response to AGC's motion, she has waived any of the available defenses, although we nonetheless note that the record of the Louisiana disciplinary proceeding reveals that she was provided with notice and opportunity to be heard in that matter, and likewise was provided with multiple levels of review (see Rules for Atty Disciplinary Matters [22 NYCRR] § 1240.13[b] ).  Accordingly, we grant AGC's motion on this point, and turn to the discipline to be imposed (see Matter of Singh, 245 AD3d at 1062).

Garry, P.J., Pritzker, Fisher, Mackey and Ryba, 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 disbarred and her name is stricken from the roll of attorneys and counselors-at-law of the State of New York, effective immediately;  and it is further

ORDERED that respondent is commanded to desist and refrain from the practice of law in any form in the State of New York, either as principal or as agent, clerk or employee of another;  and respondent is hereby forbidden to appear as an attorney or counselor-at-law before any court, judge, justice, board, commission or other public authority, or to give to another an opinion as to the law or its application, or any advice in relation thereto, or to hold herself out in any way as an attorney and counselor-at-law in this state;  and it is further

ORDERED that respondent shall comply with the provisions of the Rules for Attorney Disciplinary Matters regulating the conduct of disbarred attorneys and shall duly certify to the same in her 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 her.