Court Opinion

ID: 9381701
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-03-23 16:06:12.359248+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:17:33.850562
License: Public Domain

Matter of Attorneys in Violation of Judiciary Law § 468-a (Tamura) (2023 NY Slip Op 01567)

Matter of Attorneys in Violation of Judiciary Law § 468-a (Tamura)

2023 NY Slip Op 01567

Decided on March 23, 2023 

Appellate Division, Third Department

Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law § 431.

This opinion is uncorrected and subject to revision before publication in the Official Reports.

Decided and Entered:March 23, 2023 

PM-58-23
[*1]In the Matter of Attorneys in Violation of Judiciary Law § 468-a. Attorney Grievance Committee for the Third Judicial Department, Petitioner; Kyoko Tamura, Respondent. (Attorney Registration No. 5320007.)

Calendar Date:December 12, 2022

Before:

Monica A. Duffy, Attorney Grievance Committee for the Third Judicial Department, Albany, for Attorney Grievance Committee for the Third Judicial Department.
McElroy, Deutsch, Mulvaney & Carpenter, LLP, Morristown, New Jersey (Kathleen Feroleto Chetta of counsel), for respondent.

Motion by respondent for an order reinstating her to the practice of law following her suspension by October 2021 order of this Court (Matter of Attorneys in Violation of Judiciary Law § 468-a, 198 AD3d 1068, 1086 [3d Dept 2021]	; see Rules for Attorney Disciplinary Matters [22 NYCRR] § 1240.16; Rules of App Div, 3d Dept [22 NYCRR] § 806.16).
Upon reading respondent's notice of motion and affidavit with exhibits sworn to September 16, 2022, supplemental affidavit with exhibits sworn to December 26, 2022, and the December 9, 2022 responsive correspondence from the Attorney Grievance Committee for the Third Judicial Department, and having determined, by clear and convincing evidence, that (1) respondent has complied with the order of suspension and the Rules of this Court, (2) respondent has the requisite character and fitness to practice law, and (3) it would be in the public interest to reinstate respondent to the practice of law (see Matter of Attorneys in Violation of Judiciary Law § 468-a [Andison], 211 AD3d 1307, 1308 [3d Dept 2022]), it is
ORDERED that respondent's motion for reinstatement is granted; and it is further
ORDERED that respondent is reinstated as an attorney and counselor-at-law, effective immediately.
Garry, P.J., Lynch, Aarons, Reynolds Fitzgerald and Fisher, JJ., concur.