DDC motion in New York

14 New York opinions name it 2 courts 1989–2016 0 in the last five years

The cases below were cited by New York courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.

Followed or applied (2)

Case	Followed	Cited
Associates First Capital v. Crabillgreen nyappdiv · 2008 · cited in 1 New York opinions naming this issue, 2016–2016 1 sentence 2016Under the circumstances of this case, the Supreme Court providently exercised its discretion in denying that branch of International’s motion which was, in effect, pursuant to CPLR 2004 to extend its time to submit opposition papers to the DDC’s motion (cf. Associates First Capital v Crabill, 51 AD3d 1186, 1187-1188 [2008]).	1	1
Worthy v. New York City Housing Authoritygreen nyappdiv · 2005 · cited in 1 New York opinions naming this issue, 2010–2010 1 sentence 2010(Zaid Theatre Corp. v Sona Realty Co., 18 AD3d 352, 355 [1st Dept 2005].) Abraham claims that the additional defenses are baseless, but has not demonstrated that they are plainly lacking in merit so as to warrant denial of leave to amend.	1	1

Distinguished, questioned or overruled (0)

Case	Negative	Cited
No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in New York. Read the followed side critically anyway.

Also cited on this issue (18)

Case	Cited	Years
In re Roy neutral nyappdiv · 2010 2 sentences 2013Accordingly, the DDC’s motion for an order accepting respondent’s resignation from the practice of law in the State of New York pursuant to 22 NYCRR 603.11 should be granted and her name stricken from the roll of attorneys, effective nunc pro tunc to April 24, 2013 (see Matter of Thillet, 100 AD3d 223 [1st Dept 2012]; Matter of Roy, 72 AD3d 117 [1st Dept 2010]; Matter of Freedman, 208 AD2d 325 [1st Dept 1995]). 2013Accordingly, the DDC’s motion for an order accepting respondent’s resignation from the practice of law in the State of New York pursuant to 22 NYCRR 603.11 should be granted and her name stricken from the roll of attorneys, effective nunc pro tunc to April 24, 2013 (see Matter of Thillet, 100 AD3d 223 [1st Dept 2012]; Matter of Roy, 72 AD3d 117 [1st Dept 2010]; Matter of Freedman, 208 AD2d 325 [1st Dept 1995]).	4	2012–2013
In re Freedman neutral nyappdiv · 1995 2 sentences 2013Accordingly, the DDC’s motion for an order accepting respondent’s resignation from the practice of law in the State of New York pursuant to 22 NYCRR 603.11 should be granted and her name stricken from the roll of attorneys, effective nunc pro tunc to April 24, 2013 (see Matter of Thillet, 100 AD3d 223 [1st Dept 2012]; Matter of Roy, 72 AD3d 117 [1st Dept 2010]; Matter of Freedman, 208 AD2d 325 [1st Dept 1995]). 2013Accordingly, the DDC’s motion for an order accepting respondent’s resignation from the practice of law in the State of New York pursuant to 22 NYCRR 603.11 should be granted and her name stricken from the roll of attorneys, effective nunc pro tunc to April 24, 2013 (see Matter of Thillet, 100 AD3d 223 [1st Dept 2012]; Matter of Roy, 72 AD3d 117 [1st Dept 2010]; Matter of Freedman, 208 AD2d 325 [1st Dept 1995]).	4	2012–2013
In re Thillet neutral nyappdiv · 2012 2 sentences 2013Accordingly, the DDC’s motion for an order accepting respondent’s resignation from the practice of law in the State of New York pursuant to 22 NYCRR 603.11 should be granted and her name stricken from the roll of attorneys, effective nunc pro tunc to April 24, 2013 (see Matter of Thillet, 100 AD3d 223 [1st Dept 2012]; Matter of Roy, 72 AD3d 117 [1st Dept 2010]; Matter of Freedman, 208 AD2d 325 [1st Dept 1995]). 2013Accordingly, the DDC’s motion for an order accepting respondent’s resignation from the practice of law in the State of New York pursuant to 22 NYCRR 603.11 should be granted and her name stricken from the roll of attorneys, effective nunc pro tunc to April 24, 2013 (see Matter of Thillet, 100 AD3d 223 [1st Dept 2012]; Matter of Roy, 72 AD3d 117 [1st Dept 2010]; Matter of Freedman, 208 AD2d 325 [1st Dept 1995]).	2	2013–2013
In re Jones neutral nyappdiv · 2011 2 sentences 2012Given that more than six months have elapsed since the date of this Court’s suspension order and respondent has failed to appear or contact the DDC or the Court for a hearing or reinstatement, and respondent consents to the relief sought by the DDC, the DDC’s motion for an order disbarring respondent should be granted (see Matter of Jones, 89 AD3d 227 [2011]; Matter of Bambury, 91 AD3d 141 [2011]; Matter of Delio, 17 AD3d 69 [2005]) and respondent’s name stricken from the roll of attorneys and counselors-at-law in the State of New York, effective immediately. 2012Given that more than six months have elapsed since the date of this Court’s suspension order and respondent has failed to appear or contact the DDC or the Court for a hearing or reinstatement, and respondent consents to the relief sought by the DDC, the DDC’s motion for an order disbarring respondent should be granted (see Matter of Jones, 89 AD3d 227 [2011]; Matter of Bambury, 91 AD3d 141 [2011]; Matter of Delio, 17 AD3d 69 [2005]) and respondent’s name stricken from the roll of attorneys and counselors-at-law in the State of New York, effective immediately.	2	2012–2012
In re Bambury neutral nyappdiv · 2011 2 sentences 2012Given that more than six months have elapsed since the date of this Court’s suspension order and respondent has failed to appear or contact the DDC or the Court for a hearing or reinstatement, and respondent consents to the relief sought by the DDC, the DDC’s motion for an order disbarring respondent should be granted (see Matter of Jones, 89 AD3d 227 [2011]; Matter of Bambury, 91 AD3d 141 [2011]; Matter of Delio, 17 AD3d 69 [2005]) and respondent’s name stricken from the roll of attorneys and counselors-at-law in the State of New York, effective immediately. 2012Given that more than six months have elapsed since the date of this Court’s suspension order and respondent has failed to appear or contact the DDC or the Court for a hearing or reinstatement, and respondent consents to the relief sought by the DDC, the DDC’s motion for an order disbarring respondent should be granted (see Matter of Jones, 89 AD3d 227 [2011]; Matter of Bambury, 91 AD3d 141 [2011]; Matter of Delio, 17 AD3d 69 [2005]) and respondent’s name stricken from the roll of attorneys and counselors-at-law in the State of New York, effective immediately.	2	2012–2012
In re Delio neutral nyappdiv · 2005 2 sentences 2012Given that more than six months have elapsed since the date of this Court’s suspension order and respondent has failed to appear or contact the DDC or the Court for a hearing or reinstatement, and respondent consents to the relief sought by the DDC, the DDC’s motion for an order disbarring respondent should be granted (see Matter of Jones, 89 AD3d 227 [2011]; Matter of Bambury, 91 AD3d 141 [2011]; Matter of Delio, 17 AD3d 69 [2005]) and respondent’s name stricken from the roll of attorneys and counselors-at-law in the State of New York, effective immediately. 2012Given that more than six months have elapsed since the date of this Court’s suspension order and respondent has failed to appear or contact the DDC or the Court for a hearing or reinstatement, and respondent consents to the relief sought by the DDC, the DDC’s motion for an order disbarring respondent should be granted (see Matter of Jones, 89 AD3d 227 [2011]; Matter of Bambury, 91 AD3d 141 [2011]; Matter of Delio, 17 AD3d 69 [2005]) and respondent’s name stricken from the roll of attorneys and counselors-at-law in the State of New York, effective immediately.	2	2012–2012
In re Kennedy neutral nyappdiv · 2008 2 sentences 2011Matter of Fletcher, 70 AD3d 63 [2009], Matter of Kennedy, 55 AD3d 169 [2008]; Matter of Benzing, 51 AD3d 236 [2008]; Matter of Ryans, 46 AD3d 71 [2007]), and the respondent’s name stricken from the roll of attorneys and counselors-at-law in the State of New York, effective the date hereof. 2011Matter of Fletcher, 70 AD3d 63 [2009]; Matter of Burke, 62 AD3d 94 [2009]; Matter of Kennedy, 55 AD3d 169 [2008]; Matter of Lopez, 53 AD3d 198 [2008]), her cross motion to stay the proceedings denied, and respondent’s name stricken from the roll of attorneys and counselors-at-law in the State of New York, effective the date hereof.	2	2011–2011
In re Fletcher green nyappdiv · 2009 2 sentences 2011Matter of Fletcher, 70 AD3d 63 [2009], Matter of Kennedy, 55 AD3d 169 [2008]; Matter of Benzing, 51 AD3d 236 [2008]; Matter of Ryans, 46 AD3d 71 [2007]), and the respondent’s name stricken from the roll of attorneys and counselors-at-law in the State of New York, effective the date hereof. 2011Matter of Fletcher, 70 AD3d 63 [2009]; Matter of Burke, 62 AD3d 94 [2009]; Matter of Kennedy, 55 AD3d 169 [2008]; Matter of Lopez, 53 AD3d 198 [2008]), her cross motion to stay the proceedings denied, and respondent’s name stricken from the roll of attorneys and counselors-at-law in the State of New York, effective the date hereof.	2	2011–2011
In re Lopez neutral nyappdiv · 2008 1 sentence 2011Matter of Fletcher, 70 AD3d 63 [2009]; Matter of Burke, 62 AD3d 94 [2009]; Matter of Kennedy, 55 AD3d 169 [2008]; Matter of Lopez, 53 AD3d 198 [2008]), her cross motion to stay the proceedings denied, and respondent’s name stricken from the roll of attorneys and counselors-at-law in the State of New York, effective the date hereof.	1	2011–2011
In re Burke neutral nyappdiv · 2009 1 sentence 2011Matter of Fletcher, 70 AD3d 63 [2009]; Matter of Burke, 62 AD3d 94 [2009]; Matter of Kennedy, 55 AD3d 169 [2008]; Matter of Lopez, 53 AD3d 198 [2008]), her cross motion to stay the proceedings denied, and respondent’s name stricken from the roll of attorneys and counselors-at-law in the State of New York, effective the date hereof.	1	2011–2011
In re Ryans neutral nyappdiv · 2007 1 sentence 2011Matter of Fletcher, 70 AD3d 63 [2009], Matter of Kennedy, 55 AD3d 169 [2008]; Matter of Benzing, 51 AD3d 236 [2008]; Matter of Ryans, 46 AD3d 71 [2007]), and the respondent’s name stricken from the roll of attorneys and counselors-at-law in the State of New York, effective the date hereof.	1	2011–2011
In re Benzing neutral nyappdiv · 2008 1 sentence 2011Matter of Fletcher, 70 AD3d 63 [2009], Matter of Kennedy, 55 AD3d 169 [2008]; Matter of Benzing, 51 AD3d 236 [2008]; Matter of Ryans, 46 AD3d 71 [2007]), and the respondent’s name stricken from the roll of attorneys and counselors-at-law in the State of New York, effective the date hereof.	1	2011–2011
Bearden v. Quorum Health Group, Inc. green scotus · 1998 1 sentence 1999Respondent joins in the DDC’s motion and notes that by order dated October 5, 1998 (— US —, 119 S Ct 50 ), the United States Supreme Court denied his petition for a writ of certiorari to review his conviction.	1	1999–1999
In re Grubart neutral nyappdiv · 1989 1 sentence 1991(See, Matter of Pins, 169 AD2d 166 ; Matter of Sylvan, 156 AD2d 56 ; Matter of Grubart, 152 AD2d 185 .) Accordingly, the DDC’s motion is granted and the respondent is suspended from the practice of law forthwith pursuant to 22 NYCRR 603.4 (e) (1) (iii) and until such time as the disciplinary investigation pending before the DDC has been concluded and until further order of this court.	1	1991–1991
In re Sylvan neutral nyappdiv · 1990 1 sentence 1991(See, Matter of Pins, 169 AD2d 166 ; Matter of Sylvan, 156 AD2d 56 ; Matter of Grubart, 152 AD2d 185 .) Accordingly, the DDC’s motion is granted and the respondent is suspended from the practice of law forthwith pursuant to 22 NYCRR 603.4 (e) (1) (iii) and until such time as the disciplinary investigation pending before the DDC has been concluded and until further order of this court.	1	1991–1991
In re Pins neutral nyappdiv · 1991 1 sentence 1991(See, Matter of Pins, 169 AD2d 166 ; Matter of Sylvan, 156 AD2d 56 ; Matter of Grubart, 152 AD2d 185 .) Accordingly, the DDC’s motion is granted and the respondent is suspended from the practice of law forthwith pursuant to 22 NYCRR 603.4 (e) (1) (iii) and until such time as the disciplinary investigation pending before the DDC has been concluded and until further order of this court.	1	1991–1991
In re Bing neutral nyappdiv · 1987 1 sentence 1990(Matter of Bing, 128 AD2d 96 .) Accordingly, respondent should be disbarred and his name stricken from the roll of attorneys and counselors-at-law forthwith.	1	1990–1990
In re Gordon green nyappdiv · 1988 1 sentence 1989(Matter of Gordon, 142 AD2d 135 .) Accordingly, pursuant to 22 NYCRR 603.4 (e) (1) (i), respondent is suspended from the practice of law forthwith, until such time as the complaint against him has been finally disposed of and until further order of this court.	1	1989–1989

← Caselaw search · G Cite Topics · Brief Check