From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Grievance Comm. for Tenth Judicial Dist. v. DiGirolomo (In re DiGirolomo)

SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK Appellate Division, Second Judicial Department
Sep 25, 2019
177 A.D.3d 97 (N.Y. App. Div. 2019)

Opinion

2019–06720

09-25-2019

In the MATTER OF Alfred C. DIGIROLOMO, Jr., an attorney and counselor-at-law. Grievance Committee for the Tenth Judicial District, Petitioner; v. Alfred C. DiGirolomo, Jr., Respondent. (Attorney Registration No. 2389849)

Catherine A. Sheridan, Hauppauge, N.Y. (Stacey J. Sharpelletti of counsel), for petitioner.


Catherine A. Sheridan, Hauppauge, N.Y. (Stacey J. Sharpelletti of counsel), for petitioner.

ALAN D. SCHEINKMAN, P.J., WILLIAM F. MASTRO, REINALDO E. RIVERA, MARK C. DILLON, RUTH C. BALKIN, JJ.

OPINION & ORDER

PER CURIAM.

On April 4, 2019, the respondent pleaded guilty before the Honorable Teresa K. Corrigan, Acting Justice of the Supreme Court, Nassau County, to the crime of grand larceny in the second degree, in violation of Penal Law § 155.40(1), a class C felony.

The Grievance Committee for the Tenth Judicial District moves to strike the respondent's name from the roll of attorneys and counselors-at-law pursuant to Judiciary Law § 90(4)(b) based upon his felony conviction. Although the respondent was duly served, he has neither opposed the motion nor interposed any response thereto.

Pursuant to Judiciary Law § 90(4)(a), the respondent was automatically disbarred and ceased to be an attorney upon his conviction of a felony.

Accordingly, the motion to strike the respondent's name from the roll of attorneys and counselors-at-law, pursuant to Judiciary Law § 90(4)(b), is granted to reflect the respondent's automatic disbarment as of April 4, 2019.

SCHEINKMAN, P.J., MASTRO, RIVERA, DILLON and BALKIN, JJ., concur.

ORDERED that the motion of the Grievance Committee for the Tenth Judicial District is granted; and it is further,

ORDERED that pursuant to Judiciary Law § 90(4)(a), the respondent, Alfred C. DiGirolomo, Jr., is disbarred, effective April 4, 2019, and his name is stricken from the roll of attorneys and counselors-at-law, pursuant to Judiciary Law § 90(4)(b) ; and it is further,

ORDERED that the respondent, Alfred C. DiGirolomo, Jr., shall comply with the rules governing the conduct of disbarred or suspended attorneys (see 22 NYCRR 1240.15 ); and it is further,

ORDERED that pursuant to Judiciary Law § 90, the respondent, Alfred C. DiGirolomo, Jr., is commanded to desist and refrain from (1) practicing law in any form, either as principal or as agent, clerk, or employee of another; (2) appearing as an attorney or counselor-at-law before any court, Judge, Justice, board, commission, or other public authority; (3) giving to another an opinion as to the law or its application or any advice in relation thereto; and (4) holding himself out in any way as an attorney and counselor-at-law; and it is further, ORDERED that if the respondent, Alfred C. DiGirolomo, Jr., has been issued a secure pass by the Office of Court Administration, it shall be returned forthwith to the issuing agency, and the respondent shall certify to the same in his affidavit of compliance pursuant to 22 NYCRR 1240.15(f).


Summaries of

Grievance Comm. for Tenth Judicial Dist. v. DiGirolomo (In re DiGirolomo)

SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK Appellate Division, Second Judicial Department
Sep 25, 2019
177 A.D.3d 97 (N.Y. App. Div. 2019)
Case details for

Grievance Comm. for Tenth Judicial Dist. v. DiGirolomo (In re DiGirolomo)

Case Details

Full title:In the Matter of Alfred C. DiGirolomo, Jr., an attorney and…

Court:SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK Appellate Division, Second Judicial Department

Date published: Sep 25, 2019

Citations

177 A.D.3d 97 (N.Y. App. Div. 2019)
106 N.Y.S.3d 915
2019 N.Y. Slip Op. 6769