| Matter of Baldeo, Albert Jairam; Grievance Committee for the Second, E |
| Motion No: 2015-00923 |
| Slip Opinion No: 2017 NY Slip Op 89802(U) |
| Decided on October 19, 2017 |
| Appellate Division, Second Department, Motion Decision |
| Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law § 431. |
| This motion is uncorrected and is not subject to publication in the Official Reports. |
Appellate Division: Second Judicial Department
M239286
E/ct
RANDALL T. ENG, P.J.
WILLIAM F. MASTRO
REINALDO E. RIVERA
MARK C. DILLON
RUTH C. BALKIN, JJ.
|
2015-00923 In the Matter of Albert Jairam Baldeo, a suspended attorney. Grievance Committee for the Second, Eleventh, and Thirteenth Judicial Districts, petitioner; Albert Jairam Baldeo, respondent. (Attorney Registration No. 2509800)
| DECISION & ORDER ON MOTION |
Motion by the respondent to stay a disciplinary proceeding commenced in this Court, pending the determination by the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York of his motion to vacate his conviction of certain federal felonies. By decision and order on motion dated June 19, 2015, this Court immediately suspended the respondent from the practice of law upon his conviction of a serious crime pursuant to Judiciary Law § 90(4)(f), based upon his conviction of federal felonies, authorized the Grievance Committee for the Second, Eleventh, and Thirteenth Judicial Districts to institute and prosecute a disciplinary proceeding against him, stayed the hearing in the disciplinary proceeding pending his release from incarceration, and directed him to notify this Court when he was released. The respondent's counsel advised the Court, by affirmation dated September 28, 2016, that the respondent had been released from incarceration. By decision and order on motion dated February 6, 2017, this Court denied the respondent's prior motion to stay the disciplinary proceeding, and, on the Court's own motion, vacated so much of the decision and order on motion of this Court dated June 19, 2015, as stayed the disciplinary proceeding, and directed the parties to proceed with the previously authorized hearing. 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 16, 1992.
Upon the papers filed in support of the motion and the papers filed in opposition thereto, it is
ORDERED that the motion is denied; and it is further,
ORDERED that the parties are directed to proceed with the previously authorized hearing.
ENG, P.J., MASTRO, RIVERA, DILLON and BALKIN, JJ., concur.
ENTER:
Aprilanne Agostino
Clerk of the Court