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: Robert Nicholas HOLUP, a Resigned Attorney. (Attorney Registration No. 5587480)
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER ON MOTION
Robert Nicholas Holup was admitted to practice by this Court in January 2018. In July 2017, Holup was admitted to practice in the state of New Jersey, where he remains an attorney in good standing.1 Thereafter, in August 2020, Holup applied for leave to resign from the New York bar for nondisciplinary reasons, citing his admission in other jurisdictions and the lack of any necessity to maintain his New York law license as a condition of employment with his former employer. This Court granted Holup's application and removed his name from the roll of attorneys and counselors-at-law in November 2020 (188 A.D.3d 1552, 132 N.Y.S.3d 894 [2020]). Holup now applies for his reinstatement (see Rules for Attorney Disciplinary Matters [22 NYCRR] § 1240.22), and the Attorney Grievance Committee for the Third Judicial Department advises that it does not oppose his application.
An applicant seeking reinstatement from nondisciplinary resignation must “establish both the requisite legal education or experience and the necessary character and fitness as would be required of an applicant for admission in the first instance” (Matter of Weiss, 166 A.D.3d 1159, 1160, 86 N.Y.S.3d 327 [2018]; see Matter of Gaudioso, 159 A.D.3d 1217, 1218, 70 N.Y.S.3d 93 [2018]). In making our determination, we have wide discretion to either grant the application, with or without any conditions deemed appropriate, or to deny the application with leave to renew upon the completion of the Multistate Professional Responsibility Examination, additional continuing legal education or even the New York Bar Examination (see Rules for Attorney Disciplinary Matters [22 NYCRR] § 1240.22[b]; see generally Matter of Tuve, 171 A.D.3d 1392, 1393, 98 N.Y.S.3d 355 [2019]).
Holup has properly submitted his application for reinstatement from nondisciplinary resignation in the form provided in appendix F to the Rules for Attorney Disciplinary Matters (22 NYCRR) part 1240 (see Rules of App.Div., 3d Dept. [22 NYCRR] § 806.22[b]). In doing so, Holup attests that, since the date of our order granting his resignation, he has no criminal history and has not been subjected to any discipline in any jurisdiction in which he is admitted. To this end, Holup provides proof that he is presently in good standing in New Jersey, his home jurisdiction. Further, Holup attests that he does not suffer from any condition or impairment affecting his ability to practice law. Finally, Holup provides proof of his compliance with the continuing legal education requirements of his home jurisdiction, which would in turn satisfy his requirements in this state (see Rules of App.Div., All Depts [22 NYCRR] § 1500.5[b][1]; § 1500.22[n][1]). Accordingly, we find that Holup “has the requisite legal training and experience, as well as the necessary character and fitness, to justify his reinstatement” (Matter of Weiss, 166 A.D.3d at 1160, 86 N.Y.S.3d 327), and we therefore grant his application for reinstatement and restore his name to the roll of attorneys in this state, effective immediately.
ORDERED that Robert Nicholas Holup's application for reinstatement is granted; and it is further
ORDERED that Robert Nicholas Holup's name is hereby restored to the roll of attorneys and counselors-at-law of the State of New York, effective immediately; and it is further
ORDERED that Robert Nicholas Holup shall, within 30 days of the date of this decision, file an attorney registration statement with the Chief Administrator of the Courts pursuant to Judiciary Law § 468–a and Rules of the Chief Administrator of the Courts (22 NYCRR) § 118.1.
FOOTNOTES
1. Holup was also previously admitted in the District of Columbia, but resigned from the practice of law in that jurisdiction in September 2020.
Per Curiam.
Garry, P.J., Clark, Aarons, Pritzker and Reynolds Fitzgerald, JJ., concur.
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–45–22
Decided: March 03, 2022
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)