Respondent asks this Court to permit him to continue the practice of law during the pendency of the disciplinary hearing so that he may be able to show the Hearing Panel what he has done to correct his misconduct and persuade the Panel to temper justice with mercy. Respondent also points out that he has made complete restitution, has made no attempt to conceal the fact that he misused the funds, and has admitted his misconduct and cooperated fully with the Disciplinary Committee. Nevertheless, his admissions and the other evidence clearly show that respondent is guilty of serious professional misconduct and are sufficient to warrant immediate suspension under the provisions of 22 NYCRR 603.4 (e) (1) (ii) and (iii) (see, Matter of Pins, 169 A.D.2d 166; Matter of Markowitz, 160 A.D.2d 5). Accordingly, the Committee's motion is granted and respondent is suspended from the practice of law forthwith pursuant to 22 NYCRR 603.4 (e) (1) (ii) and (iii) of the rules of this Court, until such time as the disciplinary matters pending before the Committee have been concluded, and until further order of this Court.
"(ii) a substantial admission under oath that the attorney has committed an act or acts of professional misconduct". Respondent's admissions under oath of acts which constitute dishonest, fraudulent and deceitful misconduct in violation of Code of Professional Responsibility DR 1-102 (A) (4) are clearly sufficient to warrant immediate suspension under the provisions of 22 NYCRR 603.4 (e) (1) (ii) (see, Matter of Pins, 169 A.D.2d 166; Matter of Markowitz, 160 A.D.2d 5). Accordingly, the Committee's motion should be granted and respondent should be immediately suspended from the practice of law until such time as the disciplinary matters pending before the Committee have been concluded and until further order of this Court. CARRO, J.P., ROSENBERGER, ELLERIN, KUPFERMAN and ROSS, JJ., concur.
Respondent has not answered the DDC's requests for a response to the complaint, and he has not responded to the instant motion seeking his immediate suspension. The DDC contends, and we agree, that respondent's admissions under oath that he has committed serious acts of professional misconduct require immediate intervention by this court in the form of an order prohibiting him from practicing law pending resolution of the disciplinary proceeding now pending against him (Matter of Pins, 169 A.D.2d 166). Accordingly, petitioner's motion should be granted, and respondent suspended from the practice of law forthwith, and until such time as the disciplinary matter before the DDC has been concluded, and until further order of this court. SULLIVAN, J.P., CARRO, MILONAS, ASCH and RUBIN, JJ., concur.
The uncontroverted evidence of serious professional misconduct, together with the respondent's admissions of conversion, clearly warrant immediate intervention by the court to protect the public interest. (See, Matter of Pins, 169 A.D.2d 166; Matter of Sylvan, 156 A.D.2d 56; Matter of Grubart, 152 A.D.2d 185.) Accordingly, the DDC's motion is granted and the respondent is suspended from the practice of law forthwith pursuant to 22 NYCRR 603.4 (e) (1) (iii) and until such time as the disciplinary investigation pending before the DDC has been concluded and until further order of this court.