Appellate Division: Second Judicial Department

M186477

E/ct

RANDALL T. ENG, P.J.

WILLIAM F. MASTRO

REINALDO E. RIVERA

MARK C. DILLON

JEFFREY A. COHEN, JJ.

2014-08919 In the Matter of Debra Ann Purcell-Regis, an attorney and counselor-at-law. Grievance Committee for the Second, Eleventh, and Thirteenth Judicial Districts, petitioner; Debra Ann Purcell-Regis, respondent. (Attorney Registration No. 2700151)

DECISION & ORDER ON MOTION

Motion by the Grievance Committee for the Second, Eleventh, and Thirteenth Judicial Districts (1) to suspend the respondent from the practice of law, pursuant to 22 NYCRR 691.4(l)(1)(i), upon a finding that she is guilty of professional misconduct immediately threatening the public interest in that she failed to submit written answers to complaints of professional misconduct filed against her; (2) to authorize the Grievance Committee to institute and prosecute a disciplinary proceeding against the respondent based upon the allegations set forth in a verified petition dated September 29, 2014; (3) to direct the respondent to submit an answer to the petition; and (4) to refer the issues raised to a Special Referee, to hear and report. The respondent was admitted to the Bar at a term of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the Second Judicial Department on September 20, 1995.

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

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

ORDERED that pursuant to 22 NYCRR 691.4(l)(1)(i), the respondent, Debra Ann

Purcell-Regis, is immediately suspended from the practice of law in the State of New York, pending further order of the Court; and it is further,

ORDERED that the respondent, Debra Ann Purcell-Regis, shall promptly comply with this Court's rules governing the conduct of disbarred, suspended, and resigned attorneys (see 22 NYCRR 691.10); and it is further,

ORDERED that pursuant to Judiciary Law § 90, during the period of suspension and until further order of this Court, the respondent, Debra Ann Purcell-Regis, is commanded to desist and refrain from (1) practicing law in any form, either as principal or agent, clerk, or employee of another, (2) appearing as an attorney or counselor-at-law before any court, Judge, Justice, board, commission, or other public authority, (3) giving to another an opinion as to the law or its application or any advice in relation thereto, and (4) holding herself out in any way as an attorney and counselor-at-law; and it is further,

ORDERED that the Grievance Committee for the Second, Eleventh, and Thirteenth Judicial Districts is hereby authorized to institute and prosecute a disciplinary proceeding in this Court, against Debra Ann Purcell-Regis, based on the verified petition dated September 29, 2014; and it is further,

ORDERED that Diana Maxfield Kearse, Chief Counsel, Grievance Committee for the Second, Eleventh and Thirteenth Judicial Districts, Renaissance Plaza, 335 Adams Street - Suite 2400, Brooklyn, N.Y. 11201-3745, is hereby appointed as attorney for the petitioner in such proceeding; and it is further,

ORDERED that within 20 days after service upon her of a copy of this decision and order on motion, the respondent, Debra Ann Purcell-Regis shall serve an answer upon the petitioner and the Special Referee, appointed herein, and shall file the original answer with this Court; and it is further,

ORDERED that the issues raised by the petition and any answer thereto are referred to the Honorable Harry E. Seidell, 10 Thorn Grove Lane, Dix Hills, N.Y. 11746-6709, to hear and report, and to submit a report, which contains his findings on the issues, within 60 days after the conclusion of the hearing or the submission of post-hearing memoranda; and it is further,

ORDERED that if the respondent, Debra Ann Purcell-Regis, has been issued a secure pass by the Office of Court Administration, it shall be returned forthwith to the issuing agency and the respondent shall certify to the same in her affidavit of compliance pursuant to 22 NYCRR 691.10(f).

We find, prima facie, that the respondent is guilty of professional misconduct immediately threatening the public interest based on her failure to cooperate with the lawful investigation of the Grievance Committee for the Second, Eleventh, and Thirteenth Judicial Districts with regard to two complaints of professional misconduct.

Sua Sponte Complaint

On October 1, 2013, the Grievance Committee sent the respondent a letter, addressed to her office, informing her that the Grievance Committee had initiated a sua sponte investigation based upon allegations that she, inter alia, in her capacity as attorney for the fiduciary of the estate of Joseph Filano (hereinafter the Estate) diverted over $500,000 from the Estate to her own use. The letter requested that the respondent submit a written answer to the complaint within 10 days upon the receipt thereof. The respondent was granted an extension of time until November 29, 2013, to respond to the allegations. The respondent thereafter failed to respond or request any further extension.

On December 23, 2013, the Grievance Committee sent a second letter, via first class mail and by certified mail, return receipt requested, to the respondent, addressed at her office. The letter noted her failure to answer and requested that she submit a written answer by January 13, 2014. The return receipt card, bearing an illegible signature, was returned to the Grievance Committee. The respondent failed to answer or request any further extension.

On April 1, 2014, counsel for the Grievance Committee telephoned the respondent at her office and left a voicemail message asking the respondent to return the call. The respondent failed to contact the Grievance Committee.

On June 6, 2014, a subpoena duces tecum and subpoena ad testificandum, so-ordered by the Clerk of this Court, were personally served on the respondent. The subpoenas directed the respondent to appear at the Grievance Committee's office at 10:00 A.M. on June 25, 2014, and directed that she produce specific files and bank records in connection with the investigation. After the respondent failed to appear, counsel for the Grievance Committee telephoned the respondent at 10:20 A.M., and left a voicemail message asking the respondent to call right away. The respondent failed to appear or communicate with the Grievance Committee in any manner.

To date, the respondent has failed to submit a written answer to the complaint.

Complaint of Marva Watson

On April 9, 2014, the Grievance Committee sent the respondent a letter, addressed to her office, informing her that it had initiated an investigation based upon allegations of misconduct filed by Marva Watson. Ms. Watson alleged, inter alia, that the respondent had failed to return $5,000 due to her in connection with a real estate closing that occurred in or about 2004, in which the respondent represented Ms. Watson. The letter, which included a copy of the complaint, requested that the respondent submit a written answer to the complaint within 10 days upon the receipt thereof. The respondent failed to submit an answer or request an extension of time.

On May 27, 2014, the Grievance Committee sent the respondent a second letter, addressed to her office, via first class mail and by certified mail, return receipt requested, which noted that the respondent failed to answer the complaint, and requested a written answer by June 10, 2014. Although the letter sent by certified mail was returned unclaimed, the letter sent first class mail was not returned. The respondent failed to answer or request an extension of time.

On July 25, 2014, the Grievance Committee sent the respondent a third letter, addressed to her home, via first class mail and by certified mail, return receipt requested, which noted that the respondent failed to answer the complaint. The third letter demanded an answer, and advised the respondent of the Grievance Committee's authority to seek her immediate suspension from the practice of law if she failed to cooperate with a disciplinary investigation. The return receipt card, signed by Michael Regis, was returned.

To date, the respondent has failed to submit a written answer to the complaint or request an extension of time to do so.

Although personally served with a copy of the order to show cause on October 8, 2014, the respondent has not submitted any papers in response or requested additional time in which to do so.

Based on the foregoing, the motion is granted, the respondent is immediately suspended from the practice of law, pursuant to 22 NYCRR 691.4(l)(1)(i), pending further order of this Court, the Grievance Committee is authorized to institute and prosecute a disciplinary proceeding against her, and the matter is referred to a Special Referee, to hear and report.

ENG, P.J., MASTRO, RIVERA, DILLON and COHEN, JJ., concur.

ENTER:

Aprilanne Agostino

Clerk of the Court