proceeding in which the attorney has the right to be heard. If the Committee concludes
that the attorney may face public discipline, then, consistent with the objective of
“protect[ing] the public, maintain[ing] the integrity and honor of the profession, or
deter[ing] others from committing similar misconduct,” the matter is brought before the
Appellate Division (22 NYCRR 1240.7[d][2][v]; see also 1240.8; Matter of Nearing, 16
AD2d at 518). The Court is tasked with the responsibility of reviewing the record and
deciding whether there has been any misconduct and if so, what the appropriate
discipline would be (22 NYCRR 1240.8).
In certain cases, the Committee may, during the pendency of its investigation,
make a motion to the Court for an attorney’s interim suspension. Interim suspension is
a serious remedy, available only in situations where it is immediately necessary to
protect the public from the respondent’s violation of the Rules (22 NYCRR 1240.9; see
Matter of Liebowitz, 2020 WL 7421390 [SD NY 2020]). At bar, the AGC is proceeding
on the basis that there is uncontroverted evidence of professional misconduct (22
NYCRR 1240.9[a][5]; Matter of Aris, 162 AD3d 75, 81 [1st Dept 2018]; Matter of
Pomerantz, 158 AD3d 26, 28 [1st Dept 2018]).1 Importantly, when an attorney is
suspended on an interim basis, he or she nonetheless has an opportunity for a postsuspension hearing (22 NYCRR 1240.9[c]).
122
NYCRR 1240.9(a) states in pertinent part:
“A respondent may be suspended from practice on an
interim basis during the pendency of an investigation or
proceeding on application or motion of a Committee…..upon
a finding by the Court that the respondent has engaged in
conduct immediately threatening the public interest. Such a
finding may be based upon . . . (5) other uncontroverted
evidence of professional misconduct.”
4