Matter of Porcelli

Full title: IN THE MATTER OF EDWARD J. PORCELLI (ADMITTED AS EDWARD JOHN PORCELLI), A…

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

Date published: May 23, 2000

271 A.D.2d 141 (N.Y. App. Div. 2000)

707 N.Y.S.2d 450

Opinion

March 16, 2000.

May 23, 2000.

Disciplinary proceedings instituted by the Departmental Disciplinary Committee for the First Judicial Department. Respondent, as Edward John Porcelli, was admitted to the Bar at a Term of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court for the First Judicial Department on February 11, 1974. An unpublished order of this Court was entered on February 10, 1999 permitting the Committee to serve the notice of motion to suspend upon respondent by publication in the New York Law Journal.

James T. Shed, of counsel (Thomas J. Cahill, Chief Counsel), for petitioner.

No appearance for respondent.

Before: Hon. Joseph P. Sullivan, Presiding Justice, Ernst H. Rosenberger, Israel Rubin, David B. Saxe, John T. Buckley, Justices.

Per Curiam

Respondent, Edward J. Porcelli, was admitted to the practice of law in the State of New York by the First Judicial Department on February 11, 1974, as Edward John Porcelli, and, at all times relevant to this proceeding, maintained an office for the practice of law within this Department. On April 15, 1999, this Court granted the Disciplinary Committee's motion, pursuant to 22 NYCRR 603.4 (e) (1) (iii), to suspend respondent from the practice of law based upon uncontested evidence of professional misconduct. (Matter of Porcelli, 257 A.D.2d 124.)

The Committee now moves for an order disbarring respondent from the practice of law. Pursuant to 22 N.Y.CRR § 603.4 (g), the Committee's notice of motion to suspend respondent advised him that an attorney who is suspended and who has not appeared or applied in writing for a hearing or reinstatement for six months from the date of an order of suspension may be disbarred without further notice. Despite service of the instant motion upon respondent at two different addresses, he has failed to appear or apply in writing for a hearing or reinstatement. More than six months have passed since the date of his suspension.

Accordingly, the Committee's motion should be granted (Matter of Tucker, 241 A.D.2d 250), and respondent's name stricken from the roll of attorneys, effective immediately.

All concur.

Order filed.

Motion granted and respondent disbarred, and his name stricken from the roll of attorneys and counselors-at-law in the State of New York, effective immediately.