From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

In re Hinckley

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
Mar 14, 2019
170 A.D.3d 1375 (N.Y. App. Div. 2019)

Opinion

PM-30-19

03-14-2019

In the MATTER OF Christopher Walter HINCKLEY, an Attorney. (Attorney Registration No. 5228309)

Christopher Walter Hinckley, St. Louis, Missouri, pro se. Monica A. Duffy, Attorney Grievance Committee for the Third Judicial Department, Albany, for Attorney Grievance Committee for the Third Judicial Department.


Christopher Walter Hinckley, St. Louis, Missouri, pro se.

Monica A. Duffy, Attorney Grievance Committee for the Third Judicial Department, Albany, for Attorney Grievance Committee for the Third Judicial Department.

Before: Egan Jr., J.P., Clark, Mulvey, Aarons and Rumsey, JJ.

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER ON MOTION

Per Curiam.

Christopher Walter Hinckley was admitted to practice by this Court in 2014 and lists a business address in the City of Albany with the Office of Court Administration. Hinckley now seeks leave to resign from the New York bar for nondisciplinary reasons (see Rules for Attorney Disciplinary Matters [ 22 NYCRR] § 1240.22 [a] ). The Attorney Grievance Committee for the Third Judicial Department (hereinafter AGC) opposes the application by correspondence from its Chief Attorney.

As is noted by AGC, Hinckley is presently delinquent in his New York attorney registration requirements, having failed to register for the biennial period beginning in 2018 (see Judiciary Law § 468–a ; Rules of the Chief Admin. of Cts. [22 NYCRR] § 118.1). Inasmuch as Hinckley is therefore subject to potential disciplinary action (see Judiciary Law § 468–a[5] ; Rules of Professional Conduct [ 22 NYCRR 1200.0 ] rule 8.4[d]; see also Matter of Attorneys in Violation of Judiciary Law § 468–a, 113 A.D.3d 1020, 1021 [2014] ), he is ineligible for nondisciplinary resignation and his application must be denied (see Matter of Cluff, 148 A.D.3d 1346, 1346, 47 N.Y.S.3d 919 [2017] ; Matter of Bomba, 146 A.D.3d 1226, 1226–1227, 46 N.Y.S.3d 433 [2017] ). Further, any future application by Hinckley must be supported by proof of his full satisfaction of the requirements of Judiciary Law § 468–a and Rules of the Chief Administrator of the Courts (22 NYCRR) § 118.1 (see Matter of Frank, 146 A.D.3d 1228, 1228–1229, 46 N.Y.S.3d 434 [2017] ).

Egan Jr., J.P., Clark, Mulvey, Aarons and Rumsey, JJ., concur.

ORDERED that Christopher Walter Hinckley's application for permission to resign is denied.


Summaries of

In re Hinckley

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
Mar 14, 2019
170 A.D.3d 1375 (N.Y. App. Div. 2019)
Case details for

In re Hinckley

Case Details

Full title:In the Matter of CHRISTOPHER WALTER HINCKLEY, an Attorney.

Court:Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

Date published: Mar 14, 2019

Citations

170 A.D.3d 1375 (N.Y. App. Div. 2019)
170 A.D.3d 1375
2019 N.Y. Slip Op. 1886