Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department, New York.
In the Matter of Michael MANN an attorney and counselor-at-law:
Departmental Disciplinary Committee for the First Judicial Department, Petitioner,
Michael Mann, Respondent.
Dec. 28, 2006.
Background: Following attorney's conviction of a felony offense, Disciplinary Committee moved for his automatic disbarment.
Holding: The Supreme Court, Appellate Division, held that attorney convicted of first-degree scheme to defraud, a class E felony, was automatically disbarred.
Attorney and Client 45 59.14(6)
45 Attorney and Client
45I The Office of Attorney
45k59.1 Punishment; Disposition
45k59.14 Disbarment; Revocation of License
45k59.14(6) k. Automatic Disbarment. Most Cited Cases
Attorney convicted of first-degree scheme to defraud, a class E felony, was automatically disbarred by operation of law as of date of entry of his guilty plea. McKinney's Judiciary Law § 90(4)(b); McKinney's Penal Law § 190.65(1)(a).
**125 Thomas J. Cahill, Chief Counsel, Departmental Disciplinary Committee, New York (Raymond Vallejo, of counsel), for petitioner.
Nicolas C. Cooper for respondent.
RICHARD T. ANDRIAS, Justice Presiding, DAVID FRIEDMAN, JOSEPH P. SULLIVAN, EUGENE NARDELLI, BERNARD J. MALONE, JR., Justices.
*87 Respondent Michael Mann was admitted to the practice of *88 law in the State of New York by the Second Judicial Department on January 9, 1991. At all times relevant herein respondent maintained an office for the practice of law within the First Judicial Department.
On August 9, 2006, respondent pleaded guilty in Supreme Court, New York County, to Scheme to Defraud in the first degree, in violation of Penal Law § 190.65(1)(a), a class E felony. At the plea proceeding, respondent admitted that between 2003 and 2005 he and his law partner Joshua Just engaged in a scheme in which they fraudulently obtained approximately $275,000 from ten or more of their clients by charging clients for expenses which either did not exist or for which the law firm had not paid.
The Departmental Disciplinary Committee now moves for entry of an order striking respondent's name from the roll of attorney's pursuant to Judiciary Law § 90(4)(b), on the ground that, by operation of law, respondent was disbarred upon his conviction of a felony as defined by Judiciary Law § 90(4)(e). The date of entry of a guilty plea is the date of conviction that triggers automatic disbarment (see Matter of Carpenter, 305 A.D.2d 19, 761 N.Y.S.2d 161 ; Matter of Christiansen, 220 A.D.2d 98, 642 N.Y.S.2d 24  ). Respondent, through counsel, consents to the granting of the instant petition and to entry of an order striking his name from the roll of attorneys and counselors-at-law.
Accordingly, the motion should be granted, and respondent's name stricken from the roll of attorneys and counselors-at-law in the State of New York, effective nunc pro tunc to August 9, 2006.
Respondent's name stricken from the roll of attorneys and counselors-at-law in the State of New York, effective nunc pro tunc to August 9, 2006.
N.Y.A.D. 1 Dept.,2006.
In re Mann
38 A.D.3d 87, 827 N.Y.S.2d 124, 2006 N.Y. Slip Op. 10149
END OF DOCUMENT