Matter of Attorneys in Violation of Judiciary Law § 468-a (Eagan)
2026 NY Slip Op 03048 [249 AD3d 1389]
May 14, 2026
Appellate Division, Third Department
Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law § 431.
As corrected through Wednesday, July 8, 2026
In the Matter of Attorneys in Violation of Judiciary Law § 468-a. Committee on Professional Standards, Now Known as Attorney Grievance Committee for the Third Judicial Department, Petitioner; Travis Robert Eagan, Respondent. (Attorney Registration No. 4336756.)
May 14, 2026
HEADNOTES
Attorney and Client — Reinstatement — Denial of Motion — Failure to Demonstrate Compliance with Rules of Court by Clear and Convincing Evidence
APPEARANCES OF COUNSEL
Monica A. Duffy, Attorney Grievance Committee for the Third Judicial Department, Albany (Alison M. Coan of counsel), for Attorney Grievance Committee for the Third Judicial Department.
Travis Robert Eagan, Costa Mesa, California, respondent pro se.
Motion by respondent for an order reinstating him to the practice of law following his suspension by January 2014 order of this Court (Matter of Attorneys in Violation of Judiciary Law § 468-a, 113 AD3d 1020, 1030 [3d Dept 2014]; see Rules for Atty Disciplinary Matters [22 NYCRR] § 1240.16; Rules of App Div, 3d Dept [22 NYCRR] § 806.16).
Upon reading respondent's notice of motion and affidavit with exhibits sworn to March 12, 2026, and the April 13, 2026 responsive correspondence from the Attorney Grievance Committee for the Third Judicial Department, and having determined that respondent has not demonstrated, by clear and convincing evidence, his compliance with the rules of this Court (see Rules for Atty Disciplinary Matters [22 NYCRR] § 1240.16 [a]; Rules of App Div, 3d Dept [22 NYCRR] § 806.16 [c] [5]), it is ordered that respondent's motion for reinstatement is denied.
Garry, P.J., Clark, Pritzker, Reynolds Fitzgerald and Ryba, JJ., concur.