Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

In re Mason-Kinsey

September 15, 2009

IN THE MATTER OF JONATHAN MASON-KINSEY, ADMITTED AS JONATHAN G. MASON KINSEY, AN ATTORNEY AND COUNSELOR-AT-LAW.
GRIEVANCE COMMITTEE FOR THE SECOND, ELEVENTH, AND THIRTEENTH JUDICIAL DISTRICTS, PETITIONER
v.
JONATHAN MASON-KINSEY, RESPONDENT. (ATTORNEY REGISTRATION NO. 3067642)



Per curiam.

Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law § 431.

This opinion is uncorrected and subject to revision before publication in the Official Reports.

A. GAIL PRUDENTI, P.J., WILLIAM F. MASTRO, REINALDO E. RIVERA, ROBERT A. SPOLZINO and FRED T. SANTUCCI, JJ.

DISCIPLINARY Proceeding instituted by the Grievance Committee for the Second, Eleventh, and Thirteenth Judicial Districts. The respondent was admitted to the Bar at a term of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the Second Judicial Department on November 15, 2000, under the name Jonathan G. Mason-Kinsey. By decision and order on motion of this Court dated June 4, 2008, the branch of the motion of the Grievance Committee for the Second, Eleventh, and Thirteenth Judicial Districts which was to immediately suspend the respondent was denied, the Grievance Committee for the Second, Eleventh, and Thirteenth Judicial Districts was authorized to institute and prosecute a disciplinary proceeding the respondent, and the issues raised were referred to David I. Ferber, Esq., as Special Referee to hear and report.

The Grievance Committee for the Second, Eleventh, and Thirteenth Judicial Districts (hereinafter the Grievance Committee) served the respondent with a petition dated March 11, 2008, containing 10 charges of professional misconduct. After a prehearing conference on July 28, 2008, and a hearing on September 10, 2008, the Special Referee sustained all charges with the exception of charge five. The Grievance Committee now moves to confirm the Supreme Court's report to the extent that it sustained charges 1 through 4 and 6 through 10 and to disaffirm the report to the extent that it failed to sustain charge 5. The respondent has neither cross-moved nor submitted any papers in response to the Grievance Committee's motion.

Charge one alleges that the respondent engaged in conduct involving dishonesty, deceit, fraud, or misrepresentation, in violation of Code of Professional Responsibility DRs 1-102(a)(4) and (7) (22 NYCRR 1200.3[a][4], [7]).

Between approximately January 1, 2004, and December 31, 2005, the respondent and his partner maintained three IOLA accounts at Carver Federal Savings Bank, entitled Scott Mason-Kinsey LLP IOLA, Scott Mason-Kinsey & Hart LLP IOLA, and/or Scott Mason-Kinsey & Hart IOLA II. Funds entrusted to the respondent and his partner in a fiduciary capacity, incident to their practice of law, were deposited in those accounts. The respondent engaged in a pattern and practice of drawing IOLA checks to which he signed the name of his partner, Armani B. Scott, Esq., without Mr. Scott's knowledge or consent.

Charge two alleges that the respondent engaged in a pattern and practice of drawing IOLA checks against insufficient funds, in violation of Code of Professional Responsibility DR 9-102(a) (22 NYCRR 1200.46[a]) and Code of Professional Responsibility DR 1-102(a)(7) (22 NYCRR 1200.3[a][7]).

Between approximately January 1, 2004, and December 31, 2005, the respondent and his partners maintained three IOLA accounts at Carver Federal Savings Bank into which funds entrusted to them in a fiduciary capacity, incident to their practice of law, were deposited.

On the following dates, checks in the stated amounts drawn on those accounts were dishonored due to insufficient funds:

1) June 15, 2004$92,382.71;

2) November 23, 2004$1,000.00;

3) January 18, 2005$53,000.00; and

4) August 26, 2005$412,297.02

Charge three alleges that the respondent converted funds entrusted to him as a fiduciary incident to his practice of law, in violation of Code of Professional Responsibility DR 9-102(1) (22 NYCRR 1200.46[1]) and Code of ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.