IN RE: Scott McKay WOLAS (admitted as Scott Jonathon Wolas)

Reset A A Font size: Print

Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department, New York.

IN RE: Scott McKay WOLAS (admitted as Scott Jonathon Wolas), a suspended attorney. Departmental Disciplinary Committee for the First Judicial Department, Petitioner, Scott McKay Wolas, Respondent.

Decided: February 23, 1999

MILTON L. WILLIAMS, Justice Presiding, RICHARD W. WALLACH, PETER TOM, ANGELA M. MAZZARELLI and DAVID B. SAXE, Justices. Sarah Jo Hamilton, of counsel (Thomas J. Cahill, Chief Counsel) for petitioner. No appearance for respondent.

Respondent Scott McKay Wolas was admitted to the practice of law in the State of New York by the First Judicial Department on April 25, 1977, as Scott Jonathon Wolas.   At all times relevant to this proceeding, respondent maintained an office for the practice of law within the First Judicial Department.

The Departmental Disciplinary Committee (“Committee”) previously sought an order pursuant to 22 NYCRR § 603.4(e)(1)(i), immediately suspending respondent from the practice of law until further order of the Court, due to his willful failure to cooperate with the Committee in its investigation.   This motion was granted by an order of this Court entered October 30, 1997 (Matter of Wolas, 236 A.D.2d 55, 663 N.Y.S.2d 216).

The Committee's notice of motion to suspend specifically stated, pursuant to 22 NYCRR § 603.4(g), that an attorney who is suspended and has not appeared or applied in writing to the Committee or the court for a hearing or reinstatement for six months from the date of the order of suspension, may be disbarred without further notice.

By motion dated November 4, 1998, the Committee now moves for an order disbarring respondent from the practice of law, pursuant to 22 NYCRR § 603.4(g) on the ground that respondent has been suspended under 22 NYCRR § 603.4(e)(1)(i) and has not appeared nor applied in writing to the Committee or this Court for a hearing or reinstatement for six months from the date of the order of suspension.   As with the motion to suspend, respondent has not responded to the instant motion.

Accordingly, in light of the foregoing and inasmuch as more than six months have elapsed since the date of this Court's suspension order, and respondent has neither appeared nor applied in writing to the Committee nor this Court for a hearing or reinstatement, the Committee's motion for an order disbarring respondent from the practice of law pursuant to 22 NYCRR § 603.4(g) should be granted.

Motion granted, and respondent disbarred from the practice of law in the State of New York, and respondent's name stricken from the roll of attorneys and counselors-at-law in the State of New York, all effective the date hereof.

PER CURIAM.

All concur.