Court Filings

The Appellate Division, Third Department denied Mary Elizabeth Rain's motion for reinstatement to the New York bar following a two-year suspension imposed in 2018 for multiple professional misconduct violations committed while she served as a district attorney. The court applied the three-part reinstatement test requiring compliance with suspension terms, proof of character and fitness by clear and convincing evidence, and demonstration that reinstatement would serve the public interest. The court found Rain failed to show she had meaningfully addressed the misconduct that led to suspension and provided no concrete plans or assurances that reinstatement would not harm the public, so her motion was denied.

The Appellate Division, Third Department granted Michael R. Pichowicz's application to resign from the New York bar for nondisciplinary reasons. The court reviewed Pichowicz's sworn affidavit and the Attorney Grievance Committee's response, found him eligible under the court's rules, accepted his nondisciplinary resignation, struck his name from the roll of attorneys, and ordered that he cease practicing law in New York and surrender any Attorney Secure Pass within 30 days. The decision is administrative, not punitive, and effective immediately.

The Appellate Division, Third Department granted Daniel Isaac Papermaster's application to resign from the New York bar for nondisciplinary reasons and accepted his resignation. The court reviewed Papermaster's sworn affidavit and the Attorney Grievance Committee's non-opposition, determined he was eligible under the court rules, struck his name from the roll of attorneys, and ordered that he cease practicing law in New York and surrender any Attorney Secure Pass within 30 days. The resignation is effective immediately and remains until further court order.

The Appellate Division, Third Department granted Jeremy David Mishkin's request to resign from the New York bar for nondisciplinary reasons. The court reviewed Mishkin's sworn affidavit and the Attorney Grievance Committee's letter, found him eligible under the rules governing attorney disciplinary matters, and accepted his resignation. The court struck his name from the roll of attorneys, prohibited him from practicing or holding himself out as an attorney in New York, and ordered him to surrender any Attorney Secure Pass within 30 days. The resignation is effective immediately.

The Appellate Division, Third Department granted Robin Plummer Keller's application to resign from the New York bar for nondisciplinary reasons under the court's attorney discipline rules. The court reviewed Keller's sworn affidavit and the Attorney Grievance Committee's response, found Keller eligible to resign for nondisciplinary reasons, accepted the resignation, struck his name from the roll of attorneys, enjoined him from practicing or holding himself out as an attorney in New York, and ordered surrender of any Attorney Secure Pass within 30 days.

The Appellate Division, Third Department granted attorney John R. Gowell Jr.'s request to resign from the New York bar for nondisciplinary reasons. The court reviewed Gowell's sworn affidavit and the Attorney Grievance Committee's response, found him eligible under the applicable rule, and accepted his resignation. As a result, his name is stricken from the roll of attorneys, he is prohibited from practicing or holding himself out as an attorney in New York, and he must surrender any Attorney Secure Pass within 30 days. The AGC did not oppose the application.

The Appellate Division, Third Department granted attorney Jonathan R. Flora's application to resign from the New York bar for nondisciplinary reasons. The Court reviewed Flora's sworn affidavit and the Attorney Grievance Committee's statement that it did not oppose the application, found him eligible under the court's disciplinary rules, accepted the resignation, struck his name from the roll, and imposed the usual prohibitions against practicing or holding out as an attorney in New York. Flora must surrender any Attorney Secure Pass within 30 days.

The Appellate Division, Third Department granted attorney Jacob Timothy English’s application to resign from the New York bar for nondisciplinary reasons. The court reviewed English’s sworn affidavit and the Attorney Grievance Committee’s response, found him eligible under the court’s rules, accepted his nondisciplinary resignation, struck his name from the roll, and ordered that he cease practicing or holding himself out as an attorney in New York and surrender any Attorney Secure Pass within 30 days.

The Appellate Division, Third Department granted attorney Alan E. Davis's application to resign from the New York bar for nondisciplinary reasons. The court reviewed Davis's sworn affidavit and the Attorney Grievance Committee's response, found him eligible under the court rules, accepted his resignation, struck his name from the roll of attorneys, and directed that he cease practicing law in New York and surrender any Attorney Secure Pass within 30 days. The decision is administrative, not a disciplinary sanction.

The Appellate Division, Third Department granted Jennifer T. Conti-Bediner's application to resign from the New York bar for nondisciplinary reasons. The court reviewed her sworn affidavit and the Attorney Grievance Committee's statement that it did not oppose the resignation, determined she was eligible under the court rules, accepted her resignation, and struck her name from the roll of attorneys effective immediately. The court also enjoined her from practicing or holding herself out as an attorney in New York and ordered surrender of any Attorney Secure Pass within 30 days.

The Appellate Division suspended attorney Adam Kalish for three years after confirming a Special Referee's findings that he misappropriated client funds held in his escrow (trust) account and engaged in conduct reflecting adversely on his fitness as a lawyer. The Grievance Committee brought a formal disciplinary proceeding based on a large shortfall in Kalish's escrow account. The court sustained two of three charges, rejecting one, and concluded Kalish abdicated his fiduciary responsibilities by allowing investor funds to pass through his trust account without adequate safeguards, failing to investigate or promptly report problems, and relying on an outside referrer despite his knowledge of ethical obligations.

The First Department granted the Attorney Grievance Committee's motion for reciprocal discipline and publicly censured attorney Barbara Jayne Resnick. Connecticut previously publicly reprimanded Resnick after she admitted holding herself out as an attorney while administratively suspended there for failing to pay client security fees. The New York court found no defects in the Connecticut proceeding, determined the misconduct would also violate New York Rule 5.5(a), and concluded that a public censure in New York is appropriate and consistent with the sanction imposed in Connecticut and First Department precedent.

The Appellate Division, First Department granted the Attorney Grievance Committee's motion for an immediate interim suspension of attorney William John Lloyd King. The court found uncontroverted documentary evidence — bank records and King's written admission — that he converted or misappropriated $17,420 in a client's funds to satisfy a gambling addiction. The court rejected King's request for diversion or a disability suspension, concluding his misconduct posed an immediate threat to the public and that addiction-based mitigation, restitution, or brief recovery efforts do not prevent an interim suspension pending any formal charges.

The Appellate Division, Fourth Department accepted Attorney Paul David Stern’s application to resign for non-disciplinary reasons and ordered his name removed from the roll of attorneys. The court treated the submission as a resignation petition, found no disciplinary proceeding necessary, and approved the voluntary withdrawal from the bar. The decision is procedural—it removes Stern’s authorization to practice law in New York without imposing any disciplinary sanction or further proceedings.

The Appellate Division, Fourth Department accepted the application of attorney Donald T. Schmitt to resign from the practice of law for non-disciplinary reasons and ordered his name removed from the roll of attorneys. The court treated the filing as an application to resign, found no disciplinary proceeding necessary, and granted the requested relief, resulting in Schmitt's voluntary cessation of his status as a licensed attorney in New York.

The Appellate Division, Fourth Department accepted attorney Margaret M. Quinn's application to resign for non-disciplinary reasons and ordered her name removed from the roll of attorneys. The court treated the filing as a voluntary, non-punitive resignation rather than the result of formal disciplinary proceedings and therefore approved removal without imposing sanctions. The decision is administrative: it grants the requested relief and updates the official roster of admitted attorneys accordingly.

The Appellate Division affirmed Surrogate's Court's order dismissing petitioner Barrett Hess's petition to probate the will of Janet Hess. The court reviewed the surrogate's dismissal of the probate petition following respondents' motion to dismiss and agreed with the surrogate's reasoning. The appellate court concluded there was no reversible error in the surrogate's disposition and therefore upheld dismissal, awarding costs to respondents.

The Appellate Division, Fourth Department accepted Attorney Franklin William Heller's application to resign for non-disciplinary reasons and ordered his name removed from the roll of attorneys. The court treated the submission as a voluntary resignation not prompted by disciplinary charges and granted the request, ending his authority to practice law in New York. There is no indication of misconduct findings or ongoing disciplinary proceedings in this decision; the court's action was procedural and limited to removing Heller's name from the attorney list.

The Appellate Division confirmed a referee's findings that attorney Diana G. Cunningham neglected two client matters, failed to communicate with clients and a court referee, and did not timely comply with attorney registration rules. The court found multiple violations of the Rules of Professional Conduct and registration statutes. Because Cunningham has a substantial disciplinary history with similar prior misconduct, the Court suspended her for three years and until further order, but it stayed the suspension on conditions including compliance with registration rules, participation in mental health monitoring and an attorney mentoring program, quarterly reporting, and limits on active cases.

The Appellate Division, Fourth Department, issued a memorandum and order on April 24, 2026, terminating a previously imposed suspension and granting Gregory Jon Butler's application for reinstatement to the practice of law. The court reviewed the reinstatement application under Judiciary Law section 468-a and related rules governing attorney discipline and reinstatement. Concluding that Butler met the requirements for readmission, the court ended his suspension and restored his right to practice in New York.

The Appellate Division, Fourth Department accepted an application by attorney Peter John Brevorka to resign from the practice of law for non-disciplinary reasons and ordered his name removed from the roll of attorneys. The court treated the submission as a voluntary resignation rather than a disciplinary sanction and granted the requested relief, thereby terminating his status as an active attorney in New York State.

The Appellate Division, Fourth Department accepted an attorney’s application to resign for non-disciplinary reasons and ordered his name removed from the roll of attorneys. The court processed a petition by Cody Blake Bartlett seeking resignation that was not tied to any disciplinary proceeding. After reviewing the application, the court granted the request and removed Bartlett from the official list of licensed attorneys in New York State. No disciplinary finding was made against him in this decision.

The Appellate Division, Fourth Department dismissed as moot a CPLR article 78 proceeding brought by petitioner Oscar Asencio challenging a Department of Corrections determination finding he violated incarcerated individual rules after a tier III hearing. The court concluded the challenge no longer presented a live controversy and cited controlling precedent on mootness. Consequently, the court dismissed the petition without costs and did not reach the merits of the disciplinary determination.

The Appellate Division, Third Department, granted Baidu Xu's motion to be reinstated to the practice of law after a prior suspension in September 2024. The court reviewed Xu's affidavit and the Committee's response and found by clear and convincing evidence that Xu complied with the suspension order and court rules, demonstrated the requisite character and fitness, and that reinstatement served the public interest. The court ordered immediate reinstatement under the Rules for Attorney Disciplinary Matters governing reinstatement after suspension.

The Appellate Division, Third Department granted Attorney Amanda Wurah's motion to be reinstated to the practice of law after a suspension imposed in September 2024. The court found by clear and convincing evidence that Wurah had complied with the suspension order and court rules, demonstrated the requisite character and fitness, and that reinstatement served the public interest. Based on those findings and the applicable reinstatement rule, the court ordered that Wurah is reinstated effective immediately.

The Appellate Division, Third Department granted Natalie Sirouhi Shahinian's motion to be reinstated to the practice of law after a September 2024 suspension. The court reviewed her affidavit and the Committee's response, found by clear and convincing evidence that she complied with the suspension order and applicable rules, demonstrated the requisite character and fitness, and that reinstatement served the public interest. As a result, the court ordered her reinstatement effective immediately.

The Appellate Division, Third Department affirmed the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board's decision disqualifying Peirce Screen from receiving unemployment benefits because his employment was terminated for misconduct. The appeal was brought by Screen (pro se) against his former employer A & K Automotive and the Commissioner of Labor. The court issued a short order affirming the Board's ruling without opinion or costs, leaving the Board's finding of misconduct and resulting disqualification in place.

The Appellate Division affirmed a Supreme Court order that authorized involuntary administration of psychotropic medication to Thomas B., an involuntarily committed patient who denied having a mental illness. The court reviewed a petition brought by the State and held that the petitioner proved by clear and convincing evidence that Thomas B. lacked the capacity to make a reasoned decision about treatment and that the proposed medication was narrowly tailored to protect his liberty interest. The court deferred to the hearing court’s factual findings, including the treating psychiatrist’s testimony diagnosing schizophrenia and schizoaffective disorder with violent symptoms.

The Appellate Division, First Department affirmed the Surrogate's Court order denying objectant Michael Marino’s motion for summary judgment challenging executor Janet Marino Gerlach’s accountings for two accounting periods. The court held objectants failed to prove, as a matter of law, that Gerlach’s decisions caused financial loss, that she overpaid herself fees, or that she failed to withhold estate tax to certain beneficiaries. The court found triable issues of fact based on Gerlach’s investment strategy, will provisions granting broad discretion, competing expert opinions on fees, and an attorney affidavit about tax withholding, so summary judgment was inappropriate.

The Appellate Division, Third Department granted the Attorney Grievance Committee’s motion to immediately suspend Adebukola Ogunsanya from practicing law in New York while it investigates multiple misconduct complaints. The court found she failed to respond to some complaints, did not appear for an examination under oath, and did not produce requested records. Because refusal to comply with investigative demands threatens the public interest and the disciplinary process, the court concluded interim suspension was warranted until further order, with warnings about possible disbarment if she continues not to cooperate.