midpage
Sign in to see your projects.
102 A.D.3d 23
N.Y. App. Div.
2012
Read the full case

Background

  • Respondent Earl S. David was admitted to the New York bar in 1988 and operated from a Manhattan office during 1996–2009.
  • In 2004, this Court suspended him for 15 months for participation in securities fraud, bribery, and money laundering and granted immunity in exchange for cooperation.
  • In 2011, David and 11 co-defendants were charged in SDNY with immigration fraud, false statements to authorities, mail/wire fraud, and money laundering.
  • In 2012, David pled guilty to conspiracy to commit immigration fraud and conspiracy to commit mail and wire fraud; he admitted filing over 100 false immigration documents and faced substantial potential federal penalties.
  • The Departmental Disciplinary Committee seeks disbarment under Judiciary Law § 90(4)(b), arguing the conviction is essentially similar to a NY felony; the court grants the petition nunc pro tunc to April 2, 2012.
  • Respondent is disbarred and his name is stricken nunc pro tunc to April 2, 2012.

Issues

Issue Plaintiff's Argument Defendant's Argument Held
Whether the federal conviction justifies automatic disbarment David argues automatic disbarment is warranted David contends the federal plea does not convert to NY felony disbarment Disbarment granted; conviction deemed essentially similar to NY felony
Whether timing of the petition supports nunc pro tunc relief DCD argues timely based on guilty plea/plea-based elements David notes sentencing pending Petition properly based on guilty plea; nunc pro tunc entry appropriate
Whether the plea and conduct justify disbarment despite lack of sentencing Disbarment appropriate given admission of false filings Delay in sentencing does not negate eligibility Disbarment affirmed; conduct satisfies § 90(4)(b) standard

Key Cases Cited

  • Matter of Porges, 297 AD2d 1 (1st Dept 2002) (federal conviction relating to false filings supports disbarment)
  • Matter of Amsterdam, 26 AD3d 94 (1st Dept 2005) (plea admissions establish elements of false filing and support disbarment)
  • Matter of Cutillo, 86 AD3d 1 (1st Dept 2011) (timing of strike based on guilty plea or verdict)
Read the full case

Case Details

Case Name: In re David
Court Name: Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
Date Published: Nov 8, 2012
Citations: 102 A.D.3d 23; 954 N.Y.S.2d 18
Court Abbreviation: N.Y. App. Div.
Log In