Matter of Darrow

2 Citing cases

  1. In re Wood

    67 B.R. 321 (W.D.N.Y. 1986)   Cited 1 times

    See Disciplinary Rule 5-104(A). See also, Matter of Darrow, 39 A.D.2d 62, 331 N.Y.S.2d 533; Matter of Pacor, 87 A.D.2d 392, 451 N.Y.S.2d 823; Matter of Plewniak, 91 A.D.2d 285, 458 N.Y.S.2d 771. Bankrutpcy Court did not consider the question of whether under New York law, the assignment by an attorney of a contingent fee is against public policy.

  2. Matter of Fraser

    128 A.D.2d 190 (N.Y. App. Div. 1987)   Cited 1 times
    In Matter of Fraser (128 A.D.2d 190), which is cited by the Hearing Panel in its report, Mr. Fraser was suspended for one year for borrowing money from clients and their relatives and failure to repay the loans.

    Respondent entered into three loan transactions, borrowing $6,500 from Edgar and Miriam Rose in November 1981; $6,000 from George and Lillian Schroder in March 1983; and $7,500 from Elsie Race in February 1984. A total of $16,500 plus interest remains outstanding on the loans and respondent has filed for bankruptcy. In the particular circumstances presented here, we find that respondent violated DR 5-104 (A) by borrowing money from clients and relatives of clients and failing to repay it (see, Matter of Plewniak, 91 A.D.2d 285; Matter of Pacor, 87 A.D.2d 392; Matter of Darrow, 39 A.D.2d 62). The record establishes that respondent requested clients to lend him money when he knew or should have known that he had limited means with which to repay the loans and, with respect to the last two loans, when he was in default on other obligations. The record also shows that respondent failed to disclose those facts to the lenders.