Kaylin L. Whittingham Blog

Matter of Bruzdziak

by | Jun 27, 2021 | Cases | 0 comments

Reporter

111 A.D.3d 118 *; 973 N.Y.S.2d 185 **; 2013 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6760 ***; 2013 NY Slip Op 6825 ****; 2013 WL 5708620

[****1] In the Matter of Marc A. Bruzdziak (Admitted as Marc Anthony Bruzdziak), a Suspended Attorney, Respondent. Departmental Disciplinary Committee for the First Judicial Department, Petitioner.

Prior History

Disciplinary proceedings instituted by the Departmental Disciplinary Committee for the First Judicial Department. Respondent was admitted to the bar on October 4, 2004 at a term of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the First Judicial Department as Marc Anthony Bruzdziak.

Matter of Bruzdziak, 102 AD3d 193, 958 NYS2d 2, 2012 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 8334 (N.Y. App. Div. 1st Dep’t, 2012)

Core Terms

suspension, disbarred, mail, notice, reinstatement, suspended, counselors-at-law, stricken, roll

Headnotes/Summary

Headnotes

Attorney and Client — Disciplinary Proceedings
Inasmuch as more than six months elapsed since respondent attorney was suspended from the practice of law based on his failure to cooperate with Departmental Disciplinary Committee’s investigation of allegations that he was guilty of professional misconduct, and he neither appeared nor applied in writing for a hearing or reinstatement during that time period, respondent was disbarred pursuant to 22 NYCRR 603.4 (g).

Counsel: [***1] Jorge Dopico, Chief Counsel, Departmental Disciplinary Committee, New York City (Kaylin Whittingham of counsel), for petitioner.

No appearance for respondent.

Judges: Richard T. Andrias, Justice Presiding, David B. Saxe, Karla Moskowitz, Sallie Manzanet-Daniels, Darcel D. Clark, Justices. All concur.

 

Opinion

[*119] [**185] Per Curiam. [****2]

Respondent Marc A. Bruzdziak was admitted to the practice of law in the State of New York by the First Judicial Department on October 4, 2004, under the name Marc Anthony Bruzdziak. At all times relevant to this proceeding, respondent maintained an office for the practice of law within the First Judicial Department. Respondent currently lives in Florida, and is delinquent in his Office of Court Administration attorney registration.

The Departmental Disciplinary Committee seeks an order, pursuant to Rules of the Appellate Division, First Department [**186] (22 NYCRR) § 603.4 (g), disbarring respondent from the practice of law, [***2] because he was suspended under 22 NYCRR 603.4 (e) (1) (i) and did not appear or apply to the Committee or this Court for a hearing or reinstatement within six months from the date of the order of suspension, which was December 4, 2012.

Respondent was suspended because he failed to cooperate with the Committee’s investigation into a complaint filed against him alleging neglect of an immigration matter, including respondent’s failure to appear on multiple court dates on behalf of his incarcerated client, and his failure to file required documents or to communicate with his client.

On January 22, 2013, the Disciplinary Committee served respondent with a notice of entry, enclosing a copy of the suspension order, by mailing same to his Florida address by first-class mail and certified mail return receipt requested. The Committee received the receipt for the copy mailed by certified mail, signed by respondent, on February 25, 2013.

In its previous application for immediate suspension the Committee included the following notice to respondent:

“PLEASE TAKE FURTHER NOTICE, that pursuant to 22 NYCRR 603.4 (g), an attorney who is suspended under 603.4 (e) (1) and who has not appeared or applied in writing [***3] to the Committee or the Court for a hearing or reinstatement for six months from the date of the order of suspension, may be disbarred without further notice.”

More than six months have elapsed since the date of this Court’s December 4, 2012 order of suspension but respondent has not sought a hearing or reinstatement, warranting disbarment (Matter of Claffey, 99 AD3d 201, 950 NYS2d 477 [1st Dept 2012]; Matter of [*120] Bloodsaw, 95 AD3d 226, 941 NYS2d 497 [1st Dept 2012]; Matter of Bambury, 91 AD3d 141, 933 NYS2d 548 [1st Dept 2011]).

Accordingly, the Committee’s motion to disbar respondent, pursuant to 22 NYCRR 603.4 (g), should be granted and respondent’s name stricken from the roll of attorneys and counselors-at-law in the State of New York, effective immediately.

Andrias, J.P., Saxe, Moskowitz, Manzanet-Daniels and Clark, JJ., concur.

Respondent disbarred, and his name stricken from the roll of attorneys and counselors-at-law in the State of New York, effective the date hereof.