State of New York

Supreme Court, Appellate Division

Third Judicial Department

Decided and Entered: November 10, 2016 D-64-16 

___________________________________

In the Matter of ADAM BRET 

STEIG, a Suspended Attorney. MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

 ON MOTION

(Attorney Registration No. 2665909)

___________________________________

Calendar Date: October 17, 2016

Before: McCarthy, J.P., Garry, Devine, Mulvey and Aarons, JJ.

__________

Monica A. Duffy, Attorney Grievance Committee for the Third

Judicial Department, Albany (Sarah A. Richards of counsel), for

Attorney Grievance Committee for the Third Judicial Department.

Adam Bret Steig, Summit, New Jersey, respondent pro se.

__________

Per Curiam.

Respondent was admitted to practice by this Court in 1995. 

He was previously admitted to practice in New Jersey in 1992,

where he formerly maintained an office for the practice of law.1

By order filed July 9, 2015, respondent was disbarred upon

his consent by the Supreme Court of New Jersey (Matter of Steig,

222 NJ 20, 117 A3d 173 [2015]), upon allegations that he had

knowingly misappropriated client funds. The Attorney Grievance

Committee for the Third Judicial Department (hereinafter AGC) now

1 By order entered September 24, 2009, respondent was

suspended in this state based upon his failure to register as an

attorney and to pay biennial registration fees as required (see

Matter of Attorneys in Violation of Judiciary Law § 468-a, 65

AD3d 1447, 1477 [2009]). Said suspension remains in effect to

date.
-2- D-64-16 

moves for an order imposing discipline in this state pursuant to

the Uniform Rules for Attorney Disciplinary Matters (22 NYCRR)

§ 1240.13 by reason of the discipline imposed in New Jersey. 

Respondent replied by submission of an application to resign

while the investigation or proceeding against him is pending (see

Uniform Rules for Attorney Disciplinary Matters [22 NYCRR]

§ 1240.10). By affidavit sworn to October 13, 2016, AGC has

opposed respondent's application to resign. Respondent has not

otherwise responded to AGC's motion.

Initially, we find respondent's application to resign from

the practice of law while the subject disciplinary proceeding is

pending to be deficient on its face and, therefore, it must be

denied. Despite acknowledgment that he could not defend himself

against allegations that he misappropriated client funds in New

Jersey, his subsequent disbarment on consent by the Supreme Court

of New Jersey and receipt of AGC's present motion seeking to

impose discipline based upon the discipline imposed in New

Jersey, respondent failed to disclose in his application to

resign that AGC's investigation included allegations that he had

willfully misappropriated money in the practice of law and, in

turn, he failed to provide the disclosures that are required when

such allegations are raised (see Uniform Rules for Attorney

Disciplinary Matters [22 NYCRR] § 1240.10 [a], [b]).

Turning to AGC's motion, inasmuch as respondent has not

otherwise replied to the motion, he has waived any available

defenses (see Matter of Halbfish, 78 AD3d 1320, 1321 [2010]; see

also Matter of Morin, 131 AD3d 799, 799 [2015]; Matter of

Radshaw, 130 AD3d 1139, 1139 [2015]; see generally Uniform Rules

for Attorney Disciplinary Matters [22 NYCRR] § 1240.13 [b]). 

Accordingly, we grant AGC's motion and further conclude that,

under the circumstances presented and in order to protect the

public, maintain the honor and integrity of the profession and

deter others from committing similar misconduct, respondent

should be disbarred in this state (see Matter of Dasent, 139 AD3d

1315, 1316 [2016]; Matter of Hock Loon Yong, 130 AD3d 1428, 1429

[2015]; Matter of Felli, 116 AD3d 1335, 1335 [2014]; Uniform

Rules for Attorney Disciplinary Matters [22 NYCRR] §§ 1240.8 [b]

[2]; 1240.13 [c]). 
-3- D-64-16 

McCarthy, J.P., Garry, Devine, Mulvey and Aarons, JJ.,

concur.

ORDERED that the motion of the Attorney Grievance Committee

for the Third Judicial Department is granted; and it is further

ORDERED that respondent's application to resign while a

proceeding or investigation is pending is denied; and it is

further

ORDERED that respondent is disbarred and his name is

stricken from the roll of attorneys and counselors-at-law of the

State of New York, effective immediately; and it is further 

ORDERED that 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

the Uniform Rules for Attorney Disciplinary Matters regulating

the conduct of disbarred attorneys (see Uniform Rules for

Attorney Disciplinary Matters [22 NYCRR] § 1240.15).

ENTER:

Robert D. Mayberger

Clerk of the Court