From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Matter of Coman

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Nov 1, 1948
274 App. Div. 300 (N.Y. App. Div. 1948)

Opinion

November 1, 1948.

Lewis B. Reynolds of counsel ( Einar Chrystie, attorney), for petitioner.

Charles Eno for respondent.


An official referee has reported that charges accusing respondent of having neglected to prosecute a client's action and of having failed to protect the client's interests are supported by the testimony. The record fully sustains that conclusion. The client, however, suffered no pecuniary loss as a result of respondent's neglect. Respondent also admitted his failure to file a statement of retainer in a personal injury action as required by rule 4-A of this court (Special Rules Regulating the Conduct of Attorneys and Counselors-at-Law in the First Judicial Department). Failure to comply with this rule was not willful.

In view of the many extenuating circumstances in this case, we think that a censure is sufficient punishment for respondent's misconduct.

PECK, P.J., GLENNON, COHN, VAN VOORHIS and SHIENTAG, JJ., concur.

Respondent censured.


Summaries of

Matter of Coman

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Nov 1, 1948
274 App. Div. 300 (N.Y. App. Div. 1948)
Case details for

Matter of Coman

Case Details

Full title:In the Matter of HARRY J. COMAN, Admitted as HARRY J. COHEN, an Attorney…

Court:Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department

Date published: Nov 1, 1948

Citations

274 App. Div. 300 (N.Y. App. Div. 1948)
83 N.Y.S.2d 506