From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

In re Rosten

Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Third Department, New York.
Apr 28, 2022
204 A.D.3d 1364 (N.Y. App. Div. 2022)

Opinion

PM–96–22

04-28-2022

In the MATTER OF Samuel Charles ROSTEN, an Attorney. (Attorney Registration No. 5740881)

Samuel Charles Rosten, Las Cruces, New Mexico, pro se. Monica A. Duffy, Attorney Grievance Committee for the Third Judicial Department, Albany, for Attorney Grievance Committee for the Third Judicial Department.


Samuel Charles Rosten, Las Cruces, New Mexico, pro se.

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

Before: Garry, P.J., Clark, Aarons, Ceresia and Fisher, JJ.

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER ON MOTION

Per Curiam. Samuel Charles Rosten was admitted to practice by this Court in 2019 and lists a business address in Las Cruces, New Mexico with the Office of Court Administration. Rosten 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, Rosten is presently delinquent in his New York attorney registration requirements, having failed to register for the biennial period beginning in 2021 (see Judiciary Law § 468–a ; Rules of the Chief Admin of Cts [22 NYCRR] § 118.1). Inasmuch as Rosten 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 AD3d 1020, 1021, 979 N.Y.S.2d 548 [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 Rosten 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] ).

Garry, P.J., Clark, Aarons, Ceresia and Fisher, JJ., concur.

ORDERED that Samuel Charles Rosten's application for permission to resign is denied.


Summaries of

In re Rosten

Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Third Department, New York.
Apr 28, 2022
204 A.D.3d 1364 (N.Y. App. Div. 2022)
Case details for

In re Rosten

Case Details

Full title:In the MATTER OF Samuel Charles ROSTEN, an Attorney. (Attorney…

Court:Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Third Department, New York.

Date published: Apr 28, 2022

Citations

204 A.D.3d 1364 (N.Y. App. Div. 2022)
165 N.Y.S.3d 395