Appellate Division: Second Judicial Department

M34486

K/nal

A. GAIL PRUDENTI, P.J.

ANITA R. FLORIO

HOWARD MILLER

ROBERT W. SCHMIDT

DAVID S. RITTER, JJ.

1998-00531 In the Matter of Stanley Edward Bogal, an attorney and counselor-at-law. Grievance Committee for the Tenth Judicial District, petitioner; Stanley Edward Bogal, respondent. (Attorney Registration No. 157661)

DECISION & ORDER ON MOTION

Motion by the Grievance Committee for the Tenth Judicial District for an order: 1) vacating so much of this court's decision and order on motion dated November 1, 2004, as directed the resumption of the disciplinary proceeding against the respondent which previously had been held in abeyance upon his medical suspension; and 2) referring the matter back to the Grievance Committee for the Tenth Judicial District for reconsideration and evaluation. By decision and order on motion of this court dated March 5, 1998, the Grievance Committee was authorized to institute and prosecute a disciplinary proceeding against the respondent, and the matter was referred to the Honorable Luigi R. Marano, as Special Referee, to hear and report. By subsequent decision and order on motion of this court dated June 29, 1998, the Grievance Committee was authorized to prosecute two additional charges of professional misconduct against the respondent, which were referred to the previously-appointed Special Referee. By further decision and order on motion of this court dated October 26, 1999, the petitioner's motion to confirm the report of the Special Referee and the respondent's cross motion, inter alia, to disaffirm the report were held in abeyance pending receipt of a report of a qualified medical expert regarding the respondent's ability to appear at the hearing and adequately defend himself and his fitness to practice law. By decision and order on motion of this court dated April 3, 2001, the respondent was suspended from the practice of law pursuant to 22 NYCRR 691.13(b) on the ground that he was incapacitated from continuing to practice law by reason of a medical disability and the previously-authorized disciplinary proceeding against him was held in abeyance. By decision and order on motion dated March 29, 2004, this court granted those branches of the respondent's motion and the Grievance Committee's cross motion which were for an order directing that the respondent be examined by a qualified medical expert to determine whether he is still suffering from a disability that makes it impossible for him to appear at a hearing and defend himself and whether he is still incapacitated from practicing law. The court held in abeyance, pending receipt of the report of the medical expert, those branches of the motion and cross motion which were to reopen the disciplinary proceeding or direct that it be resumed from the point at which it was held in abeyance. By decision and order on motion dated November 1, 2004, the court, upon receipt of the medical report of Michael N. Greenblatt, M.D., (1) vacated the suspension imposed upon the respondent by order dated April 3, 2001, and reinstated him to the practice of law; (2) granted those branches of the respondent's motion and the Grievance Committee's cross motion "which were to reopen the disciplinary proceeding and direct that the disciplinary proceeding be resumed from where it was held in abeyance or that the hearing be reopened to both sides" to the extent that the hearing before Special Referee Marano was re-opened to afford both the respondent and the petitioner an opportunity to present such additional evidence with respect to the pending charges as is deemed appropriate; and (3) continued to hold in abeyance the Grievance Committee's motion to confirm and the respondent's cross motion to disaffirm the Special Referee's report.

Upon the papers submitted in support of the motion and no papers having been submitted in opposition thereto, it is

ORDERED that the motion is granted in its entirety and this matter is referred back to the Grievance Committee for the Tenth Judicial District for whatever action is deemed appropriate.

PRUDENTI, P.J., FLORIO, H. MILLER, SCHMIDT and RITTER, JJ., concur.

ENTER:

James Edward Pelzer

Clerk of the Court