Kaylin L. Whittingham Blog

Matter of Telemaque

by | Jun 27, 2021 | Cases | 0 comments


110 A.D.3d 210 *; 972 N.Y.S.2d 233 **; 2013 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6059 ***; 2013 NY Slip Op 6096 ****; 2013 WL 5355042

[****1] In the Matter of Yves-Merry Telemaque, an 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 August 23, 1995 at a term of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the Second Judicial Department.

Matter of Telemaque, 30 AD3d 82, 813 NYS2d 180, 2006 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4002 (N.Y. App. Div. 2d Dep’t, 2006)

Core Terms

resignation, roll, converted, stricken, Disciplinary, nunc, tunc



Attorney and Client — Disciplinary Proceedings
Inasmuch as respondent’s proffered resignation complied with the requirements of 22 NYCRR 603.11 (a) in that her affidavit averred that the resignation was submitted voluntarily after consultation with counsel and with full awareness of the implications of its submission, and she acknowledged that she could not successfully defend herself against charges of professional misconduct if they were predicated upon the matters under investigation, respondent’s resignation was accepted and she was disbarred.

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

Richard Grayson, for respondent.

Judges: Dianne T. Renwick, Justice Presiding, Leland G. DeGrasse, Helen E. Freedman, Rosalyn H. Richter, Sallie Manzanet-Daniels, Justices. All concur.



[*211] [**233] Per Curiam. [****2]

Respondent Yves-Merry Telemaque was admitted to the practice of law in the State of New York by the Second Judicial Department on August 23, 1995. At all times relevant to this proceeding, she maintained an office for the practice of law within the First Judicial Department. In accordance with 22 NYCRR 603.11, the Departmental Disciplinary Committee moves for an order accepting respondent’s affidavit of resignation from the practice of law and striking her name from the roll of attorneys. Respondent has not responded.

Respondent’s affidavit, sworn to on June 20, 2013, complies [***2] with section 603.11 in that she states that her resignation is submitted freely, voluntarily and without coercion or duress, that she is fully aware of the implications of submitting her resignation (including that her name will be stricken from the roll of attorneys and she cannot reapply to the New York bar for seven years), that she is aware that there is a pending disciplinary investigation commenced against her alleging that she converted client funds, and that if the Committee brought charges predicated upon the misconduct under investigation, she would be unable to successfully defend herself on the merits against the allegations (see 22 NYCRR 603.11 [a] [1]-[3]).

[**234] Specifically, respondent acknowledges that, with respect to the allegation of conversion,

“[o]n March 13, 2007, I was appointed successor guardian to Cleo Veal, who later passed away on November 11, 2008. On November 7, 2008, I sold her residence. I deposited the proceeds from the sale which totaled $315,093.44 into my IOLA account. Thereafter, I failed to turn over $214,322.44 entrusted to me from the sale of the decedent’s residence. I was not authorized to use any of the monies for my own personal use, and was obligated [***3] to turn over all funds for the decedent to the Queens County Public Administrator.”

Respondent asserts that she is arranging with the Queens County Public Administrator to repay the money she converted and acknowledges that if the Lawyers’ Fund for Client Protection [*212] pays out a claim for these converted funds, then she is obligated to reimburse the Fund. Respondent has consulted with counsel of her choice and has determined that it is appropriate to submit her resignation at this time.

Accordingly, the Committee’s motion is granted, respondent’s resignation from the practice of law is accepted, and her name is hereby stricken from the roll of attorneys nunc pro tunc to June 20, 2013.

Renwick, J.P., DeGrasse, Freedman, Richter and Manzanet-Daniels, JJ., concur.

Respondent’s name stricken from the roll of attorneys and counselors-at-law in the State of New York, nunc pro tunc to June 20, 2013.