Decisions in Attorney Disciplinary Matters
February 11, 2004
| Attorney | Docket No. |
| Cary, Joi M. | P-04-013 |
| Grossman, Mark D. | P-03-006 |
| Keegan, D. Douglas | VR-04-009 |
| McKey, Taras M. | VR-04-012 |
| Piggush, Nancy Ann | VR-04-011 |
| Rowe, Douglas E. | P-04-014 |
| Wallace, Michael J. | R-04-010 |
MATTER OF JOI M. CARY, AN ATTORNEY, RESPONDENT. GRIEVANCE COMMITTEE OF THE SEVENTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT, PETITIONER. -- Order of suspension entered. Per Curiam Opinion: Respondent was admitted to the practice of law by this Court on July 13, 1994, and maintains an office for the practice of law in Fairport. The Grievance Committee filed a petition charging respondent with acts of misconduct including conversion and misrepresentation. Respondent filed an answer denying material allegations of the petition, and a referee was appointed to conduct a hearing. Prior to the hearing, the parties stipulated to amend the petition. After the hearing, the Referee submitted a report, which the Grievance Committee moves to confirm. Respondent failed to file any papers in response to the Grievance Committee’s motion and failed to appear before this Court on the return date of the motion to submit matters in mitigation.
The evidence presented at the hearing established that respondent commingled personal funds with client funds and third-party funds; failed to keep proper and necessary records for her attorney trust account; made improper on-line transfers from her attorney trust account to her business operating account, at times to cover deficits in her business operating account; and paid her attorney registration fees from funds in her attorney trust account. In addition, respondent neglected the matters of two clients by failing to complete either matter and failing to communicate with the clients therein. In one of those matters, respondent misrepresented to the client that the matter was being actively pursued in court. Respondent also failed to cooperate with the Grievance Committee and, instead, responded to inquiries in an untimely and incomplete fashion. Finally, respondent failed to stay current in her attorney registration and fees.
We confirm the Referee’s findings of fact and conclude that respondent violated the following Disciplinary Rules of the Code of Professional Responsibility:
DR 1-102 (a) (4) (22 NYCRR 1200.3 [a] [4]) - engaging in conduct involving dishonesty, fraud, deceit or misrepresentation;
DR 1-102 (a) (5) (22 NYCRR 1200.3 [a] [5]) - engaging in conduct that is prejudicial to the administration of justice;
DR 1-102 (a) (7) (22 NYCRR 1200.3 [a] [7]) - engaging in conduct that adversely reflects on her fitness as a lawyer;
DR 6-101 (a) (3) (22 NYCRR 1200.30 [a] [3]) - neglecting a legal matter entrusted to her;
DR 9-102 (a) (22 NYCRR 1200.46 [a]) - misappropriating client funds and commingling client funds with personal funds;
DR 9-102 (b) (1) (22 NYCRR 1200.46 [b] [1]) - failing to maintain client funds in a special account separate from her business or personal accounts;
DR 9-102 (c) (3) (22 NYCRR 1200.46 [c] [3]) - failing to maintain complete records of all funds of a client or third person coming into her possession and to render appropriate accounts to the client or third person regarding them;
DR 9-102 (d) (22 NYCRR 1200.46 [d]) - failing to maintain required records of bank accounts;
DR 9-102 (e) (22 NYCRR 1200.46 [e]) - making withdrawals by bank transfer without obtaining the prior written approval of the party entitled to the proceeds; and
DR 9-102 (i) (22 NYCRR 1200.46 [i]) - failing to produce in response to a subpoena issued in connection with the Grievance Committee’s investigation financial records required by the disciplinary rules to be maintained.
Additionally, by failing to comply with attorney registration requirements, respondent violated Judiciary Law § 468-a and 22 NYCRR 118.1.
We have considered the matters raised by respondent in mitigation at the hearing before the Referee. We note, however, the Referee’s finding that respondent failed to present any evidence supporting her alleged health problems or establishing a causal connection between her health problems and her misconduct. Additionally, we have considered respondent’s failure to appear before this Court or otherwise to respond to the Grievance Committee’s motion. Accordingly, after consideration of all the factors in this matter, we conclude that respondent should be suspended for three years and until further order of the Court. Additionally, we direct respondent to make restitution in accordance with the order entered herewith. PRESENT: PINE, J.P., WISNER, SCUDDER, GORSKI, AND LAWTON, JJ. (Filed Feb. 11, 2004.)
MATTER OF MARK D. GROSSMAN, AN ATTORNEY, RESPONDENT. GRIEVANCE COMMITTEE OF THE EIGHTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT, PETITIONER. -- Order of censure entered. Per Curiam Opinion: Respondent was admitted to the practice of law by this Court on February 18, 1981, and maintains an office for the practice of law in Niagara Falls. The Grievance Committee filed a petition charging respondent with acts of misconduct arising from his arrest on a charge of petit larceny that was adjourned in contemplation of dismissal and ultimately dismissed in July 2003. In his answer, respondent denied material allegations of the petition, and a referee was appointed to conduct a hearing. Prior to the hearing, respondent filed an amended answer admitting the allegations of the petition.
We conclude that respondent violated the following Disciplinary Rules of the Code of Professional Responsibility:
DR 1-102 (a) (4) (22 NYCRR 1200.3 [a] [4]) - engaging in conduct involving dishonesty, fraud, deceit or misrepresentation; and
DR 1-102 (a) (7) (22 NYCRR 1200.3 [a] [7]) - engaging in conduct that adversely reflects on his fitness as a lawyer.
We have considered the matters submitted by respondent in mitigation, including that the misconduct occurred at a time when he was suffering from severe emotional stress. Accordingly, after consideration of all the factors in this matter, we conclude that respondent should be censured. PRESENT: PINE, J.P., WISNER, SCUDDER, GORSKI, AND LAWTON, JJ. (Filed Feb. 11, 2004.)
MATTER OF D. DOUGLAS KEEGAN, AN ATTORNEY, RESIGNOR. -- Voluntary resignation accepted and name removed from the roll of attorneys (see Matter of Manown, 240 AD2d 83). PRESENT: GREEN, J.P., WISNER, SCUDDER, GORSKI, AND LAWTON, JJ. (Filed Jan. 20, 2004.)
MATTER OF TARAS M. MC KEY, AN ATTORNEY, RESIGNOR. -- Voluntary resignation accepted and name removed from the roll of attorneys (see Matter of Manown, 240 AD2d 83). PRESENT: GREEN, J.P., WISNER, SCUDDER, GORSKI, AND LAWTON, JJ. (Filed Jan. 20, 2004.)
MATTER OF NANCY ANN PIGGUSH, AN ATTORNEY, RESIGNOR. -- Voluntary resignation accepted and name removed from the roll of attorneys (see Matter of Manown, 240 AD2d 83). PRESENT: PINE, J.P., WISNER, HURLBUTT, SCUDDER, AND HAYES, JJ. (Filed Jan. 5, 2004.)
MATTER OF DOUGLAS E. ROWE, AN ATTORNEY, RESPONDENT. -- Order of suspension entered pursuant to Judiciary Law § 90 (4) (f) and (g). PRESENT: PINE, J.P., SCUDDER, GORSKI, AND LAWTON, JJ. (Filed Jan. 27, 2004.)
MATTER OF MICHAEL J. WALLACE, FOR REINSTATEMENT TO THE PRACTICE OF LAW. -- Order entered terminating suspension and reinstating petitioner to the practice of law. PRESENT: PINE, J.P., WISNER, SCUDDER, GORSKI, AND LAWTON, JJ. (Filed Feb. 11, 2004.)