 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
In re Siegel11/7/2002
We reject respondent's suggestion that his only misconduct regarding the Gines matter amounts to merely a mistake as to the status of the case. He was made aware that the case had been marked dismissed, yet did nothing to investigate or reinstate it. His incorrect recitation of the work he had performed on the case went beyond a simple honest mistake, since, at a minimum, respondent ignored his obligation to the DDC and to this Court to review his file and include in his affirmation only assertions he knew to be correct. We also concur in the Referee's rejection of respondent's assertion that he timely turned over his case file, albeit to the DDC's former address. His long delay in turning over the file, providing it only two days before the hearing, further supports imposition of a suspension here.
The recommended suspension of three months is appropriate in view of respondent's neglect of matters, excessive delays in remedying problems, failure to timely turn over documents, and inaccurate representations (see, e.g., Matter of Jaffe, 250 AD2d 13).
Accordingly, the DDC's petition should be granted, the determination of the Hearing Panel confirmed, and respondent suspended from the practice of law for a period of three months.
All concur.
Order filed.
|