Appellate Division: Second Judicial Department

M73034

E/mv

A. GAIL PRUDENTI, P.J.

WILLIAM F. MASTRO

REINALDO E. RIVERA

ROBERT A. SPOLZINO

EDWARD D. CARNI, JJ.

2007-07958 In the Matter of Edward M. Cohen, admitted as Edward Marvin Cohen, a suspended attorney. Grievance Committee for the Tenth Judicial District, petitioner; Edward M. Cohen, respondent. (Attorney Registration No. 1111970)

DECISION & ORDER ON APPLICATION

Motion by the Grievance Committee for the Tenth Judicial District for an order adjudicating the respondent in default, deeming the charges contained in the verified petition established, and imposing discipline upon him. By decision and order on motion dated December 5, 2007, the court held that the respondent's conviction of the Class B misdemeanor of attempted criminal possession of a forged instrument in the third degree, in violation of Penal Law §§ 110, 170.20, constituted a serious crime which warranted his automatic suspension were he not already suspended as a result of a previous disciplinary proceeding. By opinion and order of this court dated September 6, 2005, the respondent was suspended for a period of one year, commencing October 7, 2005, for failing to return client funds despite numerous requests and failing to cooperate with the Grievance Committee (Appellate Division Docket No. 2003-08147). The respondent has not applied for reinstatement. In the course of the December 5, 2007, order, the Grievance Committee was authorized to institute and prosecute a second disciplinary proceeding against the respondent and the issues raised were referred to Peter T. Affatato, Esq., as Special Referee to hear and report. Although that order specifically directed the respondent to serve an answer within 20 days after service upon him of the petition, the respondent failed to do so. The respondent was admitted to the Bar at a term of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the Second Judicial Department on December 14, 1955, under the name Edward Marvin Cohen.

Upon the papers submitted in support of the motion and the papers submitted in opposition thereto, it is

ORDERED that the motion is denied; and it is further,

ORDERED that the respondent's default in submitting a timely answer is vacated, his answer dated April 7, 2008, is accepted, and the parties are directed to proceed to a hearing on the issue of mitigation before the previously appointed Special Referee.

PRUDENTI, P.J., MASTRO, RIVERA, SPOLZINO and CARNI, JJ., concur.

ENTER:

James Edward Pelzer

Clerk of the Court