Opinion
M–3686
09-20-2018
In the MATTER OF Jessica E. MATIC, (admitted as Jessica Esmeralda Matic), a suspended attorney: Attorney Grievance Committee for the First Judicial Department, Petitioner, v. Jessica E. Matic, Respondent.
Jorge Dopico, Chief Attorney, Attorney Grievance Committee, New York (Kathy W. Parrino, of counsel), for petitioner. Respondent pro se.
Jorge Dopico, Chief Attorney, Attorney Grievance Committee, New York (Kathy W. Parrino, of counsel), for petitioner.
Respondent pro se.
David Friedman, Justice Presiding, Barbara R. Kapnick, Marcy L. Kahn, Ellen Gesmer, Cynthia S. Kern, Justices.
PER CURIAM
Respondent Jessica E. Matic was admitted to the practice of law in the State of New York by the Third Judicial Department on June 25, 2014, under the name Jessica Esmeralda Matic. At all times relevant to this proceeding, respondent maintained an office for the practice of law within the First Judicial Department.
The Attorney Grievance Committee (the Committee) seeks an order pursuant to the Rules for Attorney Disciplinary Matters ( 22 NYCRR) § 1240.9(a)(1) and (3) immediately suspending respondent from the practice of law until further order of the Court due to her failure to appear pursuant to subpoena and to comply with lawful demands of the Committee. Respondent, pro se, has not appeared herein.
In November 2017, the Committee received a complaint from a nonprofit organization that assists borrowers who have become victims of mortgage rescue scams. The complaint was filed on behalf of an alleged victim against respondent and respondent's employer.
The Committee sent respondent numerous letters throughout 2017 and 2018, to both her business address and her residential address, attaching a copy of the complaint and directing that she submit an answer. Via the letters, respondent was warned that her failure to cooperate with the Committee's investigation could result in formal charges and/or an interim suspension. Delivery of these letters was confirmed but no answer was submitted by respondent.
On June 14, 2018, the Committee personally served respondent with a subpoena issued by this Court that directed her to appear on June 28, 2018 to give testimony in the investigation. The subpoena was delivered to a person of suitable age and discretion at respondent's residence (the doorman) and followed up with a mailing. Both the return receipt and the USPS tracking record show that the subpoena sent by certified mail was delivered on June 19, 2018. Nevertheless, respondent did not appear at the Committee's offices on June 28 nor did she otherwise contact the Committee regarding her default.
The Committee has presented sufficient evidence for this Court to immediately suspend respondent pursuant to 22 NYCRR 1240.9(a)(1) and (3) based upon her failure to respond to the Committee's numerous requests for respondent to answer the complaint filed against her and her failure to comply with a court ordered subpoena directing her to appear to give testimony related to the investigation of the complaint (see Matter of Goldsmith, 159 A.D.3d 188, 71 N.Y.S.3d 84 [1st Dept. 2018] ; Matter of Spencer, 148 A.D.3d 223, 47 N.Y.S.3d 34 [1st Dept. 2017] ; Matter of Raum, 141 A.D.3d 198, 34 N.Y.S.3d 437 [1st Dept. 2016] ; Matter of Yoo Rok Jung, 132 A.D.3d 236, 17 N.Y.S.3d 127 [1st Dept. 2015] ; Matter of Lee, 14 A.D.3d 98, 786 N.Y.S.2d 519 [1st Dept. 2004] ).
Accordingly, the Committee's motion should be granted and respondent suspended from the practice of law pursuant to 22 NYCRR 1240.9(a)(1) and (3), effective immediately, and until further order of this Court.
Ordered that the motion is granted and respondent is suspended from the practice of law in the State of New York, effective the date hereof, and until further order of this Court.
All concur.