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

Full title: In the Matter of EOIN NICHOLAS McDONAGH, an Attorney. COMMITTEE ON…

Court: Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

Date published: Sep 13, 2018

2018 N.Y. Slip Op. 6066 (N.Y. App. Div. 2018)

2018 N.Y. Slip Op. 6066

Opinion

D-112-18

09-13-2018

In the MATTER OF Eoin Nicholas MCDONAGH, an Attorney. Committee on Professional Standards, Now Known as Attorney Grievance Committee for the Third Judicial Department, Petitioner; v. Eoin Nicholas McDonagh, Respondent. (Attorney Registration No. 4941076)

Monica A. Duffy, Attorney Grievance Committee for the Third Judicial Department, Albany (Michael G. Gaynor of counsel), for petitioner. Eoin Nicholas McDonagh, Galway, Ireland, respondent pro se.

Per Curiam.

Monica A. Duffy, Attorney Grievance Committee for the Third Judicial Department, Albany (Michael G. Gaynor of counsel), for petitioner.

Eoin Nicholas McDonagh, Galway, Ireland, respondent pro se.

Before: McCarthy, J.P., Egan Jr., Clark, Mulvey and Pritzker, JJ.

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER ON MOTION

Per Curiam.

Respondent was admitted to practice by this Court in 2011. He previously maintained a law practice in Albany County, but now lists a business address in Ireland with the Office of Court Administration.

By decision of this Court entered June 4, 2015, respondent was censured and, among other things, directed "to provide petitioner with semiannual reports by a certified public accountant confirming that he was maintaining his escrow accounts and preserving client funds in accordance with Rules of Professional Conduct ( 22 NYCRR 1200.0 ) rule 1.15" ( 129 A.D.3d 1199, 1200, 10 N.Y.S.3d 363 [2015] ). The order provided that respondent could apply to this Court for termination of the reporting requirement after the expiration of two years following the date of this Court's decision ( id. ). Respondent, who closed his attorney escrow account in April 2016 and has moved to Ireland in order to prepare to seek admission to practice in that country, now moves to terminate the reporting requirement set by this Court. Petitioner's responding papers confirm that respondent has largely complied with the reporting requirement.¹

1 Although petitioner points out that respondent did not file a final report for the period between January 2018 and June 2018, in light of the fact that this reporting period straddled the timing of respondent's submission of documentation regarding the subject motion, as well as the undisputed circumstance that respondent does not currently have an attorney escrow account, we deem it appropriate to excuse respondent from filing any further reports.
--------

Upon our examination of the papers submitted, we conclude that, under the circumstances herein, respondent's request for termination of the reporting requirement set forth in this Court's June 2015 decision be granted, effective immediately.

ORDERED that respondent's motion is granted; and it is further

ORDERED that the order of this Court entered June 4, 2015 is modified to the extent that all items set forth therein as conditions to respondent's practice of law in this state are terminated, effective immediately.

McCarthy, J.P., Egan Jr., Clark, Mulvey and Pritzker, JJ., concur.