Opinion
M-1059
07-02-2019
In the MATTER OF Jaime T. ZEAS (admitted as Jaime Teodoro Zeas), an attorney and counselor-at-law: Attorney Grievance Committee for the First Judicial Department, Petitioner, v. Jaime T. Zeas, (OCA Atty. Reg. No. 4173514), Respondent.
The Attorney Grievance Committee for the First Judicial Department, by Jorge Dopico, its Chief Attorney (Norma I. Lopez, of counsel), having moved this Court on April 15, 2019, for an order pursuant to Judiciary Law § 90(4)(b) striking the name of respondent (who, as Jaime Teodoro Zaes, was admitted to practice as an attorney and counselor-at-law in the State of New York at a Term of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court for the First Judicial Department on October 7, 2003) from the roll of attorneys and counselors-at-law in the State of New York, based upon respondent's automatic disbarment as a result of his conviction on February 3, 2017, in the Circuit Court of McHenry County Illinois, 22nd Judicial District, of child pornography in violation of Chapter 720, Section 5/11–20.1(a)(vii) of the 2009 Illinois Compiled Statutes, a felony, or, in the alternative, determining that the crime of which respondent has been convicted is a "serious crime" as defined by Judiciary Law § 90(4)(d), immediately suspending him from the practice of law pursuant to Judiciary Law § 90(4)(f), and directing respondent to show cause, pursuant to Judiciary Law § 90(4)(g), before a referee appointed by this Court pursuant to 22 NYCRR 603.12(a), why a final order of censure, suspension or disbarment should not be made,
And respondent having failed to appear herein and having failed to interpose a response to the motion,
Now, upon reading and filing the papers with respect to the petition, and due deliberation having been had thereon, and upon the Opinion Per Curiam filed herein, it is unanimously,
Ordered that the Committee's motion is granted to the extent that respondent's name is stricken from the roll of attorneys and counselors-at-law in the State of New York pursuant to Judiciary Law § 90(4)(b), and he is disbarred, effective nunc pro tunc to February 3, 2017, and it is further,
Ordered that respondent is commanded to desist and refrain from the practice of law in any form, either as principal or agent, clerk or employee of another; that respondent is forbidden to appear as an attorney or counselor-at-law before any court, judge, justice, board, commission or other public authority; that respondent is forbidden to give to another an opinion as to the law or its application or any advice in relation thereto. Respondent is directed to fully comply with the provisions of 22 NYCRR 1240.15, of the Rules of this Court, a copy of which is annexed hereto and made a part hereof.