From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Comm. on Prof'l Standards v. Cooper (In re Cooper)

Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Third Department, New York.
Nov 13, 2014
122 A.D.3d 1057 (N.Y. App. Div. 2014)

Opinion

11-13-2014

In the Matter of Jon C. COOPER, an Attorney. Committee on Professional Standards, Petitioner; v. Jon C. Cooper, Respondent.

Monica A. Duffy, Committee on Professional Standards, Albany (Alison M. Coan of counsel), for petitioner. Jon C. Cooper, respondent pro se.


Monica A. Duffy, Committee on Professional Standards, Albany (Alison M. Coan of counsel), for petitioner.

Jon C. Cooper, respondent pro se.

Before: GARRY, J.P., ROSE, LYNCH, DEVINE and CLARK, JJ.

Opinion PER CURIAM.Respondent was admitted to practice by this Court in 1994. He was convicted in the United States District Court for the District of Columbia, upon his guilty plea, of one count of federal tax evasion (26 U.S.C. § 7201 ), a federal felony that has been defined as a “serious crime” (Judiciary Law § 90[4][d] ; see Matter of Uhl, 88 A.D.3d 1052, 1052, 930 N.Y.S.2d 491 [2011],appeal dismissed 19 N.Y.3d 941, 950 N.Y.S.2d 95, 973 N.E.2d 192 [2012] ). Respondent does not dispute that, after he and an accomplice defrauded an airline company of $1 million, respondent failed to report at least $448,727 of the proceeds of that scheme on his federal tax return. On March 6, 2014, respondent was sentenced to 18 months in prison, to be followed by three years of supervised release. The sentencing court further ordered respondent to pay restitution to the defrauded airline and the federal government in the total amount of $1,140,109.86.

Petitioner now moves for an order imposing final discipline pursuant to Judiciary Law § 90(4)(g). Respondent does not contest the propriety of the motion.

Under the circumstances presented, and considering the serious criminal conduct committed by respondent (see e.g. Matter of Kerekes, 95 A.D.3d 1431, 1432, 942 N.Y.S.2d 906 [2012] ; Matter of Richichi, 52 A.D.3d 1109, 1109, 858 N.Y.S.2d 921 [2008] ), we conclude that he should be disbarred in this state.

ORDERED that petitioner's motion is granted; and it is furtherORDERED 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, 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 another opinion as to the law or its application, or any advice in relation thereto; and it is further

ORDERED that respondent shall comply with the provisions of this Court's rules regulating the conduct of disbarred attorneys (see Rules of App.Div., 3d Dept. [22 NYCRR] § 806.9 ).

GARRY, J.P., ROSE, LYNCH, DEVINE and CLARK, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Comm. on Prof'l Standards v. Cooper (In re Cooper)

Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Third Department, New York.
Nov 13, 2014
122 A.D.3d 1057 (N.Y. App. Div. 2014)
Case details for

Comm. on Prof'l Standards v. Cooper (In re Cooper)

Case Details

Full title:In the Matter of Jon C. COOPER, an Attorney. Committee on Professional…

Court:Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Third Department, New York.

Date published: Nov 13, 2014

Citations

122 A.D.3d 1057 (N.Y. App. Div. 2014)
995 N.Y.S.2d 842
2014 N.Y. Slip Op. 7740

Citing Cases

In re Cooper

Effective November 13, 2014, the Supreme Court of New York, Appellate Division, Third Department disbarred…

In re Adler

Moreover, respondent's conduct is further exacerbated by his long tenure as an attorney in California (see…