DISCIPLINARY proceeding instituted by the Grievance Committee for the Tenth Judicial District. The respondent was admitted to the Bar at a term of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the Second Judicial Department on September 26, 1990, under the name James Thomas Hytner. By decision and order on motion of this Court dated April 28, 2009, the respondent was suspended from the practice of law, the Grievance Committee for the Tenth Judicial District was authorized to institute and prosecute a disciplinary proceeding against him based on the allegations set forth in a petition dated February 9, 2009, and the issues raised were referred to Peter T. Affatato, Esq., as Special Referee to hear and report.
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, PETER B. SKELOS and MARK C. DILLON, JJ.
In a decision and order on motion of this Court dated April 28, 2009, the Grievance Committee for the Tenth Judicial District (hereinafter the Grievance Committee) was directed to serve a petition dated February 9, 2009, upon the Special Referee and to file the original with the Court within 20 days after its receipt of a copy of the decision and order on motion. That decision and order on motion further directed the respondent to serve and file an answer to the petition within 20 days after service of the decision and order upon him.
On May 7, 2009, the Grievance Committee personally served the respondent with a copy of the decision and order. Although more than 20 days have elapsed since then, the respondent failed to serve and file an answer as directed by the Court, and has not requested an extension of time within which to comply.
The Grievance Committee now moves to disbar the respondent, based upon his failure to serve and file an answer to the petition within the time frame established by the Court, to deem the charges contained in the petition established, and/or to impose such discipline upon the respondent as the Court deems appropriate under the circumstances.
The petition contains 10 charges of professional misconduct, including failure to cooperate with the Grievance Committee's investigations of five complaints of professional misconduct filed against the respondent.
Inasmuch as the respondent failed to serve and file an answer to the petition, the Grievance Committee asserts that the charges contained in the petition should be deemed established.
Accordingly, the motion of the Grievance Committee is granted, the 10 charges contained in the petition are deemed established, the respondent is disbarred, and, effective immediately, his name is stricken from the roll of attorneys and counselor-at-law.
PRUDENTI, P.J., MASTRO, RIVERA, SKELOS and DILLON, JJ., concur.
ORDERED that the petitioner's motion is granted upon the respondent's default; and it is further,
ORDERED that, pursuant to Judiciary Law § 90, effective immediately, the respondent, James T. Hytner, admitted as James Thomas Hytner, is disbarred and his name is stricken from the roll of ...