From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Matter of Liesner

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Jan 3, 1974
43 A.D.2d 223 (N.Y. App. Div. 1974)

Opinion

January 3, 1974.

John G. Bonomi of counsel ( Ronald Eisenman with him on the brief), for petitioner.

No appearance by respondent.


Respondent was admitted to practice in this Department on December 22, 1969.

He was charged with converting to his own personal use $3,200 which he was holding in escrow for a client pursuant to a contract of sale of real property. In addition, he is charged with issuing checks which were not honored when presented for payment.

Respondent did not file an answer to the charge, did not appear to defend himself before the Referee, and did not submit any papers on this application to confirm the report of the Referee.

This inaction is construed by this court as an admission of the charges and an indifference to the consequences of an adverse determination ( Matter of Schner, 5 A.D.2d 599, 600).

The charges preferred were sustained by the Referee and the report of the Referee is in all respects confirmed.

The respondent has demonstrated his lack of moral fitness to continue as a member of the profession. He should be disbarred ( Matter of Nicotina, 37 A.D.2d 300; Matter of Turk, 25 A.D.2d 255; Matter of Laykind, 21 A.D.2d 383).

MARKEWICH, J.P., KUPFERMAN, LANE, STEUER and TILZER, JJ., concur.

Respondent's name struck from the roll of attorneys and counselors at law of the State of New York.


Summaries of

Matter of Liesner

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Jan 3, 1974
43 A.D.2d 223 (N.Y. App. Div. 1974)
Case details for

Matter of Liesner

Case Details

Full title:In the Matter of JAMES D. LIESNER, an Attorney, Respondent. ASSOCIATION OF…

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

Date published: Jan 3, 1974

Citations

43 A.D.2d 223 (N.Y. App. Div. 1974)
350 N.Y.S.2d 669

Citing Cases

Matter of Thaler

We then considered the mitigating circumstances of financial distress and apparent contrition on the part of…

Matter of Siegel

The afore-mentioned charges constitute serious breaches of respondent's professional responsibilities and…