The sun. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1833-1916, 1915-01-09
90 YEARS A LAWYER
AND THEN DISBARRED
\. Lcvicn Found Guilty
Of MisappropriatinC
Clients Money.

Douglas A Levior, who has been
n,omber OF the New York bar FOR nifty
years. and whose daughter is the wife
OF John FoN Jr, son OF tho late Senator
John Fox. was disbarred yesterday by
the Appellate Division, which found him
guilty OF misapproprIating money paid
TO him by a client to disbursc. The
court also disbatred Robert c., Burlando
and suspended Richard Krause for one
year.
The opinion OF the court In Lcvien's
case states tina, between 1907 and 1909
he received as attorney for one Albert
r. Kean $3.50 10 be paid over to Mary
Wilson. in amounts Of $40 at intervals.
The Bar Association charged that Lovien
paid over only $50 and converted the
remainder 10 his own use.
The official referee OF the court who
took testimony In the case found that
while in the employ OF Kesn Mary WILL
son gave birth to a child Of which he
was the father, and that when she made
a demand on Kean for the support OF
the child Levien was retained by kcan
TO represent him II was arranged that
Keau should pay SO a month for the
support OF the child. and total payments
OF $3.50 were made to Levien rs attorney.
Mary Wilson testified that she got only
four irstalmeats of $40 each.
In his own defence Lovien said he was
quite sure" he had paid over 10 the
woman all he received. but he had no
records Of the transaction. Levien had
admitted receiving $3.50 I'm a suit 20 re-
cover the money brought in tho Munic-
ipal Court. In directing the disburment
OF Levien the court said II rs impossible
that this conduct should be overlooked"
-.
conduct in a series Of actions started
against Dr. Frederic S Mason by Mrs.
Dorothy l.. Won Huber. a widow. Tic nlei
four separate actions In the Supreme
Court, one OF which was accompanied by
an order of arrest on which III Mason
was compelled to give bail. The lawyer
also sought q warrant against Or, Mason
in a police court, but had to accept a
summons which was left for tho physician
on IA steamship on which he sailed for
Europe and was delivered to him at sea
Two OF the civil suits We're for $4,000
each for breach Of promise and two were
for $50 900 for assault.
In defence Of his conduct the lawyer
conteuded that he MAS acting b. direction
OF hit client but the Appellate Division
says that no known standard Of ethics
compels or permits an attorney to I've rs
oppressive toward defendant ~ hi' eli
Z c1lt, the plelntil, wants MIN 10 ne, ne
court said
"Thc conduct Of the respondent
! CKrausel throughoW these proceedings
transgressed the limits of permissible
prosecution and constituted notorious por-
socution."
! Rurlando Was disbarrcd because hc got
client to take a mortgage for $500 on
property owned by his father which he
represented a. being owned by another
After receiving tho money Eurlando failed
to record mortgage against the property.
On, the trial Of the disbarmcnt proceed
ngs Burlando attempted to shift the
blame for the sWindle to his fathcr and
his father tried to shoulder H. nut the Ap-
pellate Division held the testimony 10 BE-
/ false and ruled that Burlando "ie clearly
! shoWn,to be man who never should have
been admitted to practice lie had beer
lawyer only two years when the acts
complained of took place.