Opinion ID: 177062
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: Recent Untimely Submissions

Text: Since the July 31, 2007 referral order, Kuzmin has made untimely filings in six instances. On four occasions, he requested an extension of time from the Court after the briefing due date had already passed. In two cases, he submitted late briefs. In a post-hearing submission dated March 17,2009, Kuzmin specifically addressed the Committee's concern about these matters and provided supporting documentation indicating the corrective efforts that he had undertaken with respect to each case. Kuzmin argued that, of the forty to forty-five cases that he handled before the Second Circuit during this time period, these six cases are isolated instances that do • not demonstrate an ongoing pattern of dilatory conduct. Mar. 17,2009 Response, at 3 .
According to Kuzmin, in the matter of Zheng v. Mukasey, No. 07-3741-ag, he did not receive the scheduling order from the Court. Immediately upon becoming aware of the order­ three days after the brief due date - Kuzmin filed a motion for an extension of time. The Court granted the motion. In the case of Weng v. Mukasey, No. 07-4883-ag, Kuzmin timely prepared a request for a 30-day-extension of time, but the letter was never submitted to the Court, due to a clerical error by his staff. Upon discovering three days after the brief due date that the request for an extension of time had not been mailed, Kuzmin promptly moved to modify the briefing schedule. The motion was granted Zheng v. Mukasey, No. 07-5379-ag, involved two cases that had been consolidated one, a direct appeal from the BIA and the other, a subsequent appeal of a motion for reconsideration before the BIA. After the consolidation, Kuzmin expected the Court to issue a new scheduling order for the combined cases. No such order was issued, and Kuzmin missed the briefing date • 22992333v3 7 • that had been set in the direct appeal. Four months later, the Court issued an Order to Show Cause, and Kuzmin submitted a timely brief in response. In the case of Li v. Mukasey, No. 07-5380-ag, Kuzmin moved to modify the briefing schedule on the date that petitioner's brief was due. The Court granted only a one~week extension of time, but Kuzmin did not receive the order until several days after the week had expired. In fact, he had actually filed the brief one day after the new due date, without knowledge of the Court's order. Nevertheless, upon receiving the order, Kuzmin filed a motion for leave to file a late brief after-the-fact. The Court granted the motion.
In the matter of Zheng v. Mukasey, No. 08-1800-ag, Kuzmin had timely filed the brief, but it was not accepted by the clerk's office because the cover of the brief did not indicate that the case was a consolidated matter. The clerk's office requested an amended cover, which Kuzmin submitted two weeks later. In the case of Zheng v. Mukasey, No. 08-3457-ag, Kuzmin's office had erroneously recorded the brief due date as November 17,2008, instead ofNovember 7,2008. Kuzmin submitted the brief on November 17th, and upon learning that his filing was late, immediately submitted an after-the-fact motion for leave to file a late brief, which was granted.
Kuzmin's recent dilatory conduct is of particular concern to the Committee, since it occurred after Kuzmin was made aware that untimely filings were unacceptable to the Court and • such filings had resulted in a disciplinary investigation against him. In addition, at least two of the out of time filings were caused by clerical errors committed by either Kuzmin or his staff, suggesting that the administrative changes put in place by Kuzmin during 2008 were not entirely effective. Fortunately, none of the overdue filings in these six cases resulted in defaults, and thus Kuzmin's clients were not prejudiced. Nevertheless, Kuzmin's actions caused additional needless disruption and burden to the Court. Bennett, 525 F.3d at 225; D.R. 2-110(A)(2); 22 N.Y.C.R.R. § 1200.lS(A)(2); see also N.Y.R. 1.16(e). Aggravating factors with respect to this conduct include: the Court's prior referral order alleging untimely filings; and a pattern of misconduct. ABA Standards § 9.22(a) & (c). Mitigation factors are: (1) Kuzmin's timely good faith efforts to rectifY his untimely submissions by filing motions to submit late briefs or to modifY the scheduling order; (2) a cooperative attitude towards the Committee's investigation; and (3) Kuzmin's remorse. ABA Standards § 9.32(d), (e) & (1). 22992333v3 8 • •