Lexis Nexis - Case Brief

Not a Lexis Advance subscriber? Try it out for free.

Law School Case Brief

Matter of Meltzer - 2015 NY Slip Op 08945, 136 A.D.3d 14, 21 N.Y.S.3d 63 (App. Div.)

Rule:

Inasmuch as an attorney's proffered resignation complied with the requirements of 22 NYCRR 603.11 in that his affidavit averred that the resignation was submitted voluntarily after consultation with counsel and with full awareness of the implications of its submission, and he acknowledged that he could not successfully defend himself against charges of professional misconduct if they were predicated upon the matters under investigation, the attorney's resignation was accepted, and he was immediately disbarred.

Facts:

Ronald J. Meltzer was admitted to the practice of law in the State of New York by the First Judicial Department on March 26, 1990. The Departmental Disciplinary Committee moved for an order accepting Meltzer's affidavit of resignation from the practice of law and striking his name from the roll of attorneys asserting that his affidavit of resignation complied with section 603.11 in that he states that: (1) he consulted with and is represented by counsel of his choice; (2) his resignation is submitted freely, voluntarily and without coercion or duress; and (3) that he is fully aware of the implications of submitting his resignation.

Issue:

Should an attorney's affidavit of resignation from the practice of law be accepted?

Answer:

Yes

Conclusion:

The attorney's affidavit of resignation from the practice of law was accepted. The court held that an attorney's affidavit of resignation complied with 22 NYCRR 603.11 because he stated that he had consulted with and was represented by counsel of his choice, his resignation was submitted freely, voluntarily and without coercion or duress, and he was fully aware of the implications of submitting his resignation. He also stated that he was aware he was the subject of a disciplinary investigation and that if disciplinary charges were brought against him predicated on those allegations, he could not successfully defend himself on the merits against such charges.

Access the full text case Not a Lexis Advance subscriber? Try it out for free.
Be Sure You're Prepared for Class