A New York attorney was recently suspended from practicing law for two years after neglecting to follow up on a personal injury case. Slipping
In April of 2012, the attorney was retained in a personal injury action resulting from a slip and fall accident. Although he commenced the action in May of 2013 and participated in a pre-trial conference in July of 2015, after which the matter was certified ready for trial, the attorney failed to file a note of issue and certificate of readiness.
From about 2015 through early 2017, the client repeatedly called and personally visited the attorney’s office in an effort to ascertain the status of the case. However, the attorney failed to respond to his client’s inquiries and failed to advise her of the status of her case.
In March of 2016, after the attorney failed to file the required documents with the court, the action was removed from the court’s calendar. The attorney did not find out that the case had been removed from the calendar until June of 2017, when the client filed a complaint with the New York Attorney Grievance Committee.
The Grievance Committee served the attorney with a petition, containing three charges of professional misconduct, which alleged the following.
- The attorney violated rule 1.3(b) of the Rules of Professional Conduct because he neglected his client’s case, as described above.
- The attorney violated Rule 8.4(d) of the Rules of Professional Conduct because he failed to respond to the client’s complaint three times within the requisite period. It was only when the Grievance Committee subpoenaed the attorney that he appeared.
- The attorney violated Rule 8.4(h) of the Rules of Professional conduct because his conduct, based on both counts described above, adversely reflected his fitness as a lawyer.
After a prehearing conference and several subsequent hearings, the Special Referee issued a report which sustained all three charges. The Grievance Committee moved to confirm the Special Referee’s charges and to impose such discipline upon the attorney as the court deemed just and proper. The attorney submitted an affirmation in response, in which he did not oppose the confirmation of the Special Referee’s report, but instead, set forth mitigating factors for the court’s consideration.
The court ultimately found that the Special Referee properly sustained the charges and it granted the Grievance Committee’s motion to confirm the report of the Special Referee. The court, in considering the respondent’s disciplinary history to be a substantial aggravating factor, ordered that the attorney be suspended from practicing law for two years.
When the attorney applies for reinstatement, he will have to prove that he refrained from practicing law; complied with the order; complied with continuing legal education requirements; and otherwise properly conducted himself.
Read the full opinion here.
Slipping Slipping Slipping
