From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

In re Murphy

Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Third Department, New York.
Nov 9, 2017
63 N.Y.S.3d 279 (N.Y. App. Div. 2017)

Opinion

11-09-2017

In the Matter of Christopher Patrick MURPHY, an Attorney. (Attorney Registration No. 4468146).

Christopher Patrick Murphy, Palo Alto, California, pro se. Monica A. Duffy, Attorney Grievance Committee for the Third Judicial Department, Albany, for Attorney Grievance Committee for the Third Judicial Department.


Christopher Patrick Murphy, Palo Alto, California, pro se.

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

Before: Peters, P.J., Garry, Devine, Clark and Aarons, JJ.

PER CURIAM.

Christopher Patrick Murphy was admitted to practice by this Court in 2007 and lists a business address in Palo Alto, California with the Office of Court Administration. Murphy has applied to this Court, by affidavit sworn to August 25, 2017, for 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, contending that Murphy is ineligible for nondisciplinary resignation because he has failed to timely fulfill his attorney registration requirements for the 2017–2018 biennial period (see Judiciary Law § 468–a ; Matter of Lee–Davis, 154 A.D.3d 1272, 62 N.Y.S.3d 638 [2017] ; Matter of Bomba, 146 A.D.3d 1226, 1226–1227, 46 N.Y.S.3d 433 [2017] ; Rules of the Chief Admin of Cts. [22 NYCRR] § 118.1).

In reply to AGC's opposition, however, Murphy avers that he is now current in his New York attorney registration requirements. Furthermore, Office of Court Administration records confirm that Murphy has duly registered and cured any preexisting registration delinquency. Accordingly, with AGC voicing no other substantive objection to his application, and having determined that Murphy is now eligible to resign for nondisciplinary reasons (compare Matter of Tierney, 148 A.D.3d 1457, 1458, 51 N.Y.S.3d 638 [2017] ; Matter of Bomba, 146 A.D.3d at 1227, 46 N.Y.S.3d 433 ), we grant the application and accept his resignation.

ORDERED that Christopher Patrick Murphy's application for permission to resign is granted and his nondisciplinary resignation is accepted; and it is further

ORDERED that Christopher Patrick Murphy's name is hereby stricken from the roll of attorneys and counselors-at-law of the State of New York, effective immediately, and until further order of this Court (see generally Rules for Attorney Disciplinary Matters [ 22 NYCRR] § 1240.22 [b] ); and it is further

ORDERED that Christopher Patrick Murphy is commanded to desist and refrain from the practice of law in any form in the State of New York, either as principal or as agent, clerk or employee of another; and Murphy is hereby forbidden to appear as an attorney or counselor-at-law before any court, judge, justice, board, commission or other public authority, or to give to another an opinion as to the law or its application, or any advice in relation thereto, or to hold himself out in any way as an attorney and counselor-at-law in this State; and it is further.

ORDERED that Christopher Patrick Murphy shall, within 30 days of the date of this decision, surrender to the Office of Court Administration any Attorney Secure Pass issued to him.

PETERS, P.J., GARRY, DEVINE, CLARK and AARONS, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

In re Murphy

Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Third Department, New York.
Nov 9, 2017
63 N.Y.S.3d 279 (N.Y. App. Div. 2017)
Case details for

In re Murphy

Case Details

Full title:In the Matter of Christopher Patrick MURPHY, an Attorney. (Attorney…

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

Date published: Nov 9, 2017

Citations

63 N.Y.S.3d 279 (N.Y. App. Div. 2017)