Matter of Schneider ( 2016 )


Menu:
  •                            State of New York
    Supreme Court, Appellate Division
    Third Judicial Department
    Decided and Entered: April 14, 2016                     D-22-16
    ___________________________________
    In the Matter of ERIC
    SCHNEIDER, an Attorney.
    COMMITTEE ON PROFESSIONAL                    DECISION AND ORDER
    STANDARDS,                                     ON MOTION
    Petitioner;
    ERIC SCHNEIDER,
    Respondent.
    (Attorney Registration No. 2431633)
    ___________________________________
    Calendar Date:    March 21, 2016
    Before:   Lahtinen, J.P., McCarthy, Egan Jr., Lynch and Clark, JJ.
    __________
    Monica A. Duffy, Committee on Professional Standards,
    Albany (Michael K. Creaser of counsel), for petitioner.
    Russell A. Schindler, Kingston, for respondent, and
    respondent pro se.
    __________
    Per Curiam.
    Respondent was admitted to practice by the First Department
    in 1991. He currently maintains an office for the practice of
    law in the City of Kingston, Ulster County.
    By decision dated November 25, 2015, this Court suspended
    respondent from the practice of law for two years, which
    suspension was conditionally stayed (133 AD3d 1191 [2015]).
    Petitioner now moves to vacate the stay of respondent's
    suspension and to suspend him from the practice of law based
    upon, among other things, his failure to file monthly reports
    -2-                D-22-16
    from a mental health provider confirming that he is participating
    in a mental health program and his failure to file bimonthly
    reports from his attorney mentors ensuring his continuing
    compliance with the statutes and rules regulating attorney
    conduct. Respondent opposes the motion, arguing that he has
    satisfied every requirement of this Court's suspension order and,
    to the extent that he failed to file with petitioner a bimonthly
    report from Lawrence Zimmerman, he interpreted this Court's
    suspension order as requiring him to file bimonthly reports from
    only one of the two indicated attorney mentors.
    We find that petitioner has provided sufficient proof
    establishing respondent's failure to fully comply with the
    conditions of his stayed suspension (see Matter of McCallig, 130
    AD3d 1137, 1138 [2015]; Matter of Morgan, 117 AD3d 1230, 1231
    [2014]; Matter of Reul, 81 AD3d 1158, 1159 [2011]). Although we
    acknowledge that respondent commenced certain mental health
    treatment in November 2015, he failed to file any monthly reports
    with petitioner confirming such participation, as was
    specifically required, until March 2016. Nor has respondent
    offered any reasonable excuse for his failure to comply
    therewith. Respondent likewise failed to file bimonthly reports
    from Zimmerman, as was specifically required. Contrary to
    respondent's assertion, our previous order unequivocally required
    that he file with petitioner bimonthly reports "from attorney
    mentors Lawrence A. Zimmerman and Russell A. Schindler" (133 AD3d
    at 1192 [emphasis added]). Under these circumstances, respondent
    cannot credibly claim that he fully complied with the conditions
    of his stayed suspension. Accordingly, we conclude that
    petitioner's motion should be granted and that respondent should
    now be suspended from the practice of law for a period of two
    years (see Matter of McCallig, 130 AD3d at 1138; Matter of
    Gokhale, 37 AD3d 905, 906 [2007]).
    Lahtinen, J.P., McCarthy, Egan Jr., Lynch and Clark, JJ.,
    concur.
    -3-                  D-22-16
    ORDERED that petitioner's motion is granted and the stay of
    respondent's suspension is vacated, effective 20 days from the
    date of this decision; and it is further
    ORDERED that respondent is suspended from the practice of
    law for a period of two years, effective 20 days from the date of
    this decision, and until further order of this Court; 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 Rules of App Div, 3d Dept [22 NYCRR] § 806.9).
    ENTER:
    Robert D. Mayberger
    Clerk of the Court
    

Document Info

Docket Number: D-22-16

Filed Date: 4/14/2016

Precedential Status: Precedential

Modified Date: 4/14/2016