History
  • No items yet
midpage
In re Hoyt
286 A.D.2d 822
| N.Y. App. Div. | 2001
|
Check Treatment
—Per Curiam.

Respondent was admitted to practice by this Court in 1994. He maintained a law office in Arizona, where he was admitted to practice in 1979. He is presently a retired member of the State Bar of Arizona.

By order dated April 6, 2001, the Supreme Court of Arizona censured respondent for professional misconduct. Based on his interpretation of the work product doctrine, respondent had improperly directed a litigation expert to purge his file of documents from respondent discussing various causation and liability scenarios.

Petitioner moves for an order imposing reciprocal discipline upon respondent (see, 22 NYCRR 806.19). Respondent has not replied to the motion. Under the circumstances presented, we grant petitioner’s motion and reciprocally censure respondent.

Peters, J. P., Spain, Carpinello, Mugglin and Lahtinen, JJ., concur. Ordered that petitioner’s motion is granted; and it is further ordered that respondent is censured.

Case Details

Case Name: In re Hoyt
Court Name: Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
Date Published: Sep 24, 2001
Citation: 286 A.D.2d 822
Court Abbreviation: N.Y. App. Div.
AI-generated responses must be verified and are not legal advice.
Your Notebook is empty. To add cases, bookmark them from your search, or select Add Cases to extract citations from a PDF or a block of text.