State of New York

Supreme Court, Appellate Division

Third Judicial Department

Decided and Entered: December 15, 2016 D-70-16 

___________________________________

In the Matter of ANYA A. 

TENDLER, a Disbarred Attorney. MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

 ON MOTION

(Attorney Registration No. 4717286)

___________________________________

Calendar Date: November 2, 2016

Before: Garry, J.P., Lynch, Devine, Clark and Aarons, JJ.

__________

Monica A. Duffy, Attorney Grievance Committee for the Third

Judicial Department, Albany (Alison M. Coan of counsel), for

Attorney Grievance Committee for the Third Judicial Department.

Anya A. Tendler, Canton, respondent pro se.

__________

Per Curiam.

Respondent was admitted by the First Department in 2009 and

formerly maintained an office for the practice of law in the Town

of Canton, St. Lawrence County. In October 2014, respondent

pleaded guilty before St. Lawrence County Court to the class E

felony of aggravated driving while intoxicated and was placed on

interim probation for one year. Upon motion by the Attorney

Grievance Committee for the Third Judicial Department

(hereinafter AGC), this Court thereafter struck her name from the

roll of attorneys due to her plea of guilty to a felony (131 AD3d

1301 [2015]). In January 2016, upon respondent's successful

completion of a term of interim probation, and in accordance with

her plea agreement, County Court vacated respondent's felony

guilty plea and permitted her to enter a guilty plea to a

misdemeanor count of driving while intoxicated. By motion dated

July 15, 2016, respondent now applies for reinstatement. By

affidavit in opposition dated November 2, 2016, AGC opposes
-2- D-70-16 

respondent's reinstatement application.

Respondent's application for reinstatement to the practice

of law is deficient and must be denied. A respondent seeking

reinstatement following disbarment must establish, by clear and

convincing proof, that he or she has complied with the order of

disbarment and the rules of the Court, that he or she possesses

the requisite character and fitness to practice law and that his

or her reinstatement would be in the public interest (see Uniform

Rules for Attorney Disciplinary Matters [22 NYCRR] § 1240.16 [a];

see generally Rules of App Div, 3d Dept [22 NYCRR] former

§ 806.12 [b] [i]). Such an application shall include "a copy of

the order of disbarment . . . and any related decision; an

affidavit in the form in Appendix C to these Rules; and proof

that the respondent has, no more than one year prior to the date

the application is filed, successfully completed the Multistate

Professional Responsibility Examination" (Uniform Rules for

Attorney Disciplinary Matters [22 NYCRR] § 1240.16 [b]).1 

Respondent failed to offer proof establishing that she has

taken and passed the Multistate Professional Responsibility

Examination. Respondent also failed to submit an affidavit in

the form in Appendix C to the Uniform Rules for Attorney

Disciplinary Matters (see Uniform Rules for Attorney Disciplinary

Matters [22 NYCRR] § 1240.16 [b]). The affirmation that

respondent did submit in support of her application failed to

provide the relevant information that must otherwise be submitted

via completion of the subject form affidavit. Namely,

respondent's affirmation fails to provide, among other things,

whether, since entry of the order of discipline, any additional

matters were pending against her before any attorney grievance

1 We note that respondent also failed to timely file an

affidavit of compliance within 30 days of entry of this Court's

September 2015 order (see Rules of App Div, 3d Dept [22 NYCRR]

former § 806.9 [f]; see also Uniform Rules for Attorney

Disciplinary Matters [22 NYCRR] § 1240.15 [f]). Any subsequent

application by respondent seeking her reinstatement to the

practice of law, therefore, should demonstrate good cause for why

she failed to timely file such an affidavit.
-3- D-70-16 

committee in this state; whether she has been the subject of

professional discipline in any other court or jurisdiction;

whether, since entry of the order of discipline, she has engaged

in the practice of law in any other court or jurisdiction; or

whether, since the entry of the order of discipline, she has been

arrested, charged with, indicted, convicted, tried and/or entered

a plea of guilty to any felonies, misdemeanors, violations and/or

traffic infractions. Upon review of the submissions, therefore,

we conclude that respondent has not established, by clear and

convincing evidence, that she is presently entitled to

reinstatement to the practice of law (see Uniform Rules for

Attorney Disciplinary Matters [22 NYCRR] § 1240.16 [a]). 

Accordingly, we deny her application for reinstatement.

Garry, J.P., Lynch, Devine, Clark and Aarons, JJ., concur.

ORDERED that the application for reinstatement is denied.

ENTER:

Robert D. Mayberger

Clerk of the Court