Opinion
PM–41–22
03-03-2022
In the MATTER OF Keith R. WOLFE, a Suspended Attorney. (Attorney Registration No. 1510668)
Monica A. Duffy, Attorney Grievance Committee for the Third Judicial Department, Albany (Michael K. Creaser of counsel), for Attorney Grievance Committee for the Third Judicial Department.
Monica A. Duffy, Attorney Grievance Committee for the Third Judicial Department, Albany (Michael K. Creaser of counsel), for Attorney Grievance Committee for the Third Judicial Department.
Before: Egan Jr., J.P., Lynch, Clark, Pritzker and Colangelo, JJ.
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER ON MOTION
Per Curiam.
Respondent was admitted to practice by the Fourth Department in 1978. He previously maintained a business address in the Village of Chittenango, Madison County, but, by October 2019 order, this Court suspended him from the practice of law indefinitely from the practice of law pending his full cooperation with an investigation by the Attorney Grievance Committee for the Third Judicial Department (hereinafter AGC) of a December 2018 complaint alleging professional misconduct ( Matter of Wolfe, 176 A.D.3d 1302, 108 N.Y.S.3d 562 [2019] ; see Matter of Wolfe, 185 A.D.3d 1347, 128 N.Y.S.3d 313 [2020] ). Thereafter, in an unrelated matter, by June 2021 order, this Court suspended respondent indefinitely due to his failure to cooperate with AGC's investigation of a May 2020 client complaint ( Matter of Wolfe, 195 A.D.3d 1224, 145 N.Y.S.3d 429 [2021] ). Moreover, by order also issued in June 2021, the Fourth Department suspended respondent from the practice of law for one year, upon his consent, based upon his admission of further professional misconduct ( Matter of Wolfe, 196 A.D.3d 88, 145 N.Y.S.3d 473 [2021] ). All three suspension orders remain extant.
We note that respondent's significant past disciplinary history also includes his disbarment by the Fourth Department in 1989 for illegal and fraudulent conduct (Matter of Wolfe, 146 A.D.2d 234, 542 N.Y.S.2d 898 [1989], reinstated 280 A.D.2d 1007, 724 N.Y.S.2d 144 [2001] ).
AGC now seeks to disbar respondent from the practice of law pursuant to Rules for Attorney Disciplinary Matters ( 22 NYCRR) § 1240.9(b) on the basis that he failed to respond to AGC's lawful demand for information in furtherance of its investigation within six months from the date of entry of this Court's most recent June 2021 suspension order. AGC has provided respondent with notice of its application despite having no obligation to do so (see Rules for Attorney Disciplinary Matters [ 22 NYCRR] § 1240.9 [b]; see also Matter of Brownell, 187 A.D.3d 1402, 1402, 131 N.Y.S.3d 281 [2020] ). Nonetheless, respondent has failed to respond or appear, "demonstrating a clear disregard for his fate as an attorney" ( Matter of Brownell, 187 A.D.3d at 1403, 131 N.Y.S.3d 281 ). Consequently, we conclude that, under the circumstances, AGC's motion should be granted and respondent disbarred (see e.g. Matter of Stevenson, 184 A.D.3d 943, 944, 123 N.Y.S.3d 552 [2020] ; Matter of Reynolds, 175 A.D.3d 1765, 1766, 106 N.Y.S.3d 920 [2019] ; Matter of Hessberg, 173 A.D.3d 1549, 1550, 100 N.Y.S.3d 925 [2019] ; Matter of Yu, 170 A.D.3d 1421, 94 N.Y.S.3d 896 [2019] ).
Egan Jr., J.P., Lynch, Clark, Pritzker and Colangelo, JJ., concur.
ORDERED that the motion of the Attorney Grievance Committee for the Third Judicial Department is granted; and it is further
ORDERED that respondent is disbarred and his name is stricken from the roll of attorneys and counselors-at-law of the State of New York, effective immediately; and it is further
ORDERED that respondent 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 respondent 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 respondent shall comply with the provisions of the Rules for Attorney Disciplinary Matters regulating the conduct of disbarred attorneys and shall duly certify to the same in his affidavit of compliance (see Rules for Attorney Disciplinary Matters [ 22 NYCRR] § 1240.15 ).