IN RE: ATTORNEYS IN VIOLATION OF JUDICIARY LAW § 468-A. (2020)

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER ON MOTION

Respondent was admitted to practice by this Court in 1998 and presently lists a business address with the Office of Court Administration in Maryland. By January 2014 order, this Court suspended respondent from the practice of law in New York for conduct prejudicial to the administration of justice arising from her noncompliance with the attorney registration requirements of Judiciary Law § 468–a and Rules of the Chief Administrator of the Courts (22 NYCRR) § 118.1 (Matter of Attorneys in Violation of Judiciary Law § 468–a, 113 A.D.3d 1020, 1046 [2014]; see Judiciary Law § 468–a [5]; Rules of Professional Conduct [22 NYCRR 1200.0] rule 8.4[d] ). At the time that petitioner's application to suspend respondent, among others, was filed in October 2013, respondent had not fulfilled her attorney registration requirements since the 2006–2007 biennial period. Notably, while respondent cured her registration delinquency in June 2018, she did not immediately seek reinstatement. Respondent now moves, by motion returnable on June 8, 2020, for her reinstatement. Noting certain deficiencies therein, petitioner opposes respondent's application,¹ and respondent has since submitted supplemental documentation addressing petitioner's concerns.

“All attorneys seeking reinstatement from suspension must establish, by clear and convincing evidence, that (1) he or she has complied with the order of suspension and the Rules of this Court, (2) he or she has the requisite character and fitness for the practice of law, and (3) it would be in the public's interest to reinstate the attorney to practice in New York” (Matter of Attorneys in Violation of Judiciary Law § 468–a [Nenninger], 180 A.D.3d 1317, 1317–1318, 116 N.Y.S.3d 920 [2020]; see Rules for Attorney Disciplinary Matters [22 NYCRR] § 1240.16[a] ). An applicant for reinstatement must also provide, as a threshold matter, certain required documentation in support of his or her application (see Rules for Attorney Disciplinary Matters [22 NYCRR] § 1240.16[b]; part 1240, appendix C).

Initially, given the length of her suspension, respondent properly submits a sworn affidavit in the form set forth in appendix C to the Rules for Attorney Disciplinary Matters (22 NYCRR) part 1240 (see Rules for Attorney Disciplinary Matters [22 NYCRR] § 1240.16[b] ). Office of Court Administration records confirm that respondent is now current with her biennial registration requirements (see Judiciary Law § 468–a; Rules of the Chief Admin of Cts [22 NYCRR] § 118.1). Respondent has also submitted sufficient threshold documentation in support of her application, including proof that she successfully completed the Multistate Professional Responsibility Examination, as is required for all attorneys seeking reinstatement following suspensions of six months or more (see Rules for Attorney Disciplinary Matters [22 NYCRR] § 1240.16[b]; compare Matter of Attorneys in Violation of Judiciary Law § 468–a [Castle], 161 A.D.3d 1443, 1444, 73 N.Y.S.3d 774 [2018]). Moreover, having reviewed the notice of motion, respondent's affidavits and the submitted materials confirming respondent's compliance with the order of suspension and the Rules of this Court, we find that respondent has the requisite character and fitness for the practice of law and that it would be in the public's interest to reinstate her to the practice of law in New York (see Matter of Attorneys in Violation of Judiciary Law § 468–a [Mahoney], 179 A.D.3d 1352, 114 N.Y.S.3d 263 [2020]; Matter of Attorneys in Violation of Judiciary Law § 468–a [Sauer], 178 A.D.3d 1191, 114 N.Y.S.3d 523 [2019]; Matter of Attorneys in Violation of Judiciary Law § 468–a [Koschwitz], 176 A.D.3d 1300, 1301, 107 N.Y.S.3d 728 [2019]). Under these circumstances, we grant respondent's motion and reinstate her to the practice of law in New York, effective immediately.

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

ORDERED that respondent is reinstated as an attorney and counselor-at-law in the State of New York, effective immediately.

FOOTNOTES

1.   Finding no open claims against respondent, the Lawyers' Fund for Client Protection advises that it does not oppose her reinstatement to the practice of law.

Per Curiam.

Lynch, J.P., Clark, Aarons, Pritzker and Reynolds Fitzgerald, JJ., concur.