Matter of Weintraub
2014 NY Slip Op 06929
Decided on October 14, 2014
Appellate Division, First Department
Per Curiam
Published by New York State Law Reporting
Bureau pursuant to
Judiciary Law § 431.
This opinion is uncorrected and subject to revision before
publication
in the Official Reports.
Decided on October 14, 2014 SUPREME COURT, APPELLATE DIVISION
First
Judicial Department
Rolando T. Acosta, Justice Presiding,
Rosalyn H. Richter
Sallie Manzanet-Daniels
Paul G. Feinman
Judith J. Gische, Justices.
M-3492
[*1]In the Matter of Bernard A. Weintraub
(admitted as Bernard Adam
Weintraub), an attorney and
counselor-at-law: Departmental Disciplinary
Committee for the First Judicial
Department, Petitioner, Bernard A.
Weintraub, Respondent.
Disciplinary
proceedings instituted by the Departmental Disciplinary Committee for the
First
Judicial Department. Respondent, Bernard A. Weintraub, was admitted to the Bar
of
the
State of New York at a Term of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court for
the
First
Judicial Department on May 2, 1994.
Jorge
Dopico, Chief Counsel, Departmental
Disciplinary
Committee, New York
(Kevin
M. Doyle, of counsel), for petitioner.
Hinshaw
& Culbertson LLP
(Hal
R. Lieberman, of counsel), for respondent.
Per
Curiam
Respondent
Bernard A. Weintraub was admitted to the practice of law in the State of
New
York by the First Judicial Department on May 2, 1994, under the name Bernard
Adam
Weintraub. At all times relevant herein, respondent maintained a registered
business
address within the First Department.
The
Departmental Disciplinary Committee moves, pursuant to the Rules of the
Appellate Division, First Department (22 NYCRR) 603.11, for an order accepting
respondent's resignation from the practice of law and striking his name from
the roll of attorneys.
Respondent's
affidavit of resignation, sworn to on July 3, 2014, complies with section
603.11
in that he states, inter alia: (1) his resignation is submitted freely,
voluntarily and
without
coercion or duress; and (2) that he is fully aware of the implications of
submitting his
resignation (see 22 NYCRR 603.11[a][1]).
Respondent is also aware that he has been the subject of an
investigation by the
Disciplinary Committee into allegations he misappropriated client
funds 22 NYCRR
603.11[a][2]. Specifically, it was alleged that respondent: (1)
jointly represented two
clients at the closing of the sale of their home; (2) held a
portion of the sale proceeds in
his escrow account, the disbursement of which was delayed because
his clients were
involved in divorce proceedings; (3) during the period of time in
which the funds were
held in escrow and without his clients consent, he borrowed'
$600,000 "to meet certain
obligations in the face of the economic downturn and [his] consequent
inability to borrow
the money from regular institutional sources"; and (4) he
provided accountings to counsel for one of his clients which did not reflect
his misappropriation of funds from the escrow account. Respondent advised that
"he fully described" his misappropriation to his client's counsel
subsequent to providing the inaccurate accounting, and promised to restore the funds
to his escrow account. When counsel requested disbursement of the proceeds, respondent
paid over the funds in full, after certain proper payments and distributions, along
with interest for the entire escrow period.
Respondent further acknowledges he could not defend himself on the
merits if
disciplinary charges were brought against him (922 NYCRR
603.11[a][3]; Matter of
Riley, 115 AD3d 112 [1st Dept
2014]).
Accordingly, the Committee's motion should be granted to the
extent of accepting
respondent's resignation from the practice of law and striking his
name from the roll of
attorneys and counselors-at-law in the State of New York,
effective nunc pro tunc to July 3, 2014.
All concur.
Order filed. [October 14, 2014]
Acosta, J.P., Richter, Manzanet-Daniels, Feinman, and Gische, JJ.
Respondent's name stricken from the roll of attorneys and
counselors-at-law in the State of New York, nunc pro tunc to July 3, 2014.
Opinion Per Curiam. All con
No comments:
Post a Comment