From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

In Matter of Roosa [3d Dept 5-23-2008

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Third Department
May 23, 2008
2008 N.Y. Slip Op. 4739 (N.Y. App. Div. 2008)

Opinion

Decided on May 23, 2008.

Mark S. Ochs, Committee on Professional Standards, Albany (Steven D. Zayas of counsel), for petitioner.

David C. Roosa, Bainbridge, respondent pro se.

Before: Mercure, J.P., Peters, Rose, Lahtinen and Stein, JJ.


MEMORANDUM AND ORDER


Respondent was admitted to practice by the Appellate Division, Fourth Department, in 1997. He maintains an office for the practice of law in the Town of Bainbridge, Chenango County.

By confidential decision entered December 5, 2007, this Court directed respondent's examination for the purpose of determining whether he is incapacitated from continuing to practice law by reason of mental or physical illness or other mental irresponsibility ( see 22 NYCRR 806.10 [a]). Petitioner now moves for an order suspending respondent from practice by reason of mental incapacity ( see 22 NYCRR 806.10 [a]). Based upon our review of the papers submitted by petitioner in support of the motion and those submitted by respondent in opposition thereto, we conclude that petitioner's motion should be granted.

We therefore suspend respondent from the practice of law indefinitely, effective 10 days from the date of this decision, and until further order of this Court ( see 22 NYCRR 806.10 [a]). Respondent may apply for reinstatement no sooner than six months from the date of this decision. Any application for reinstatement shall include the submissions and make the showing required by this Court's rules ( see 22 NYCRR 806.12 [a], [b]), including medical opinion that he possesses the capacity to practice law. The Multistate Professional Responsibility Examination requirement ( see 22 NYCRR 806.12 [b]) is waived. Any pending disciplinary proceedings against respondent shall be held in abeyance ( see 22 NYCRR 806.10 [a]).

Mercure, J.P., Peters, Rose, Lahtinen and Stein, JJ., concur.

ORDERED that respondent is suspended from the practice of law indefinitely, effective 10 days from the date of this decision, and until further order of this Court; and it is further

ORDERED that respondent may apply for reinstatement no sooner than six months from the date of this decision; and it is further

ORDERED that, for the period of suspension, respondent is commanded to desist and refrain from the practice of law in any form, either as principal or as agent, clerk or employee of another; and respondent is hereby forbidden to appear as an attorney or counselor-at-law before any court, judge, justice, board, commission or other public authority, or to give to another an opinion as to the law or its application, or any advice in relation thereto; and it is further

ORDERED that respondent shall comply with the provisions of this Court's rules regulating the conduct of suspended attorneys ( see 22 NYCRR 806.9).


Summaries of

In Matter of Roosa [3d Dept 5-23-2008

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Third Department
May 23, 2008
2008 N.Y. Slip Op. 4739 (N.Y. App. Div. 2008)
Case details for

In Matter of Roosa [3d Dept 5-23-2008

Case Details

Full title:IN THE MATTER OF DAVID C. ROOSA, an Attorney. COMMITTEE ON PROFESSIONAL…

Court:Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Third Department

Date published: May 23, 2008

Citations

2008 N.Y. Slip Op. 4739 (N.Y. App. Div. 2008)