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 the Matter of Gideon J. Karlick (Admitted As Gideon Joseph Karlick)

July 17, 2012

IN THE MATTER OF GIDEON J. KARLICK (ADMITTED AS GIDEON JOSEPH KARLICK), AN ATTORNEY AND COUNSELOR-AT-LAW: DEPARTMENTAL DISCIPLINARY COMMITTEE FOR THE FIRST JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT, PETITIONER, GIDEON J. KARLICK, RESPONDENT.


Per curiam.

Matter of Karlick

Decided on July 17, 2012

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.

Angela M. Mazzarelli,Justice Presiding, David B. Saxe Karla Moskowitz Dianne T. Renwick Helen E. Freedman,Justices.

Disciplinary proceedings instituted by the Departmental Disciplinary Committee for the First Judicial Department. Respondent, Gideon J. Karlick, was admitted to the Bar of the State of New York at a Term of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court for the Second Judicial Department on April 19, 1978.

M-1486

(April 16, 2012)

IN THE MATTER OF GIDEON J. KARLICK, AN ATTORNEY

PER CURIAM

Respondent Gideon Joseph Karlick was admitted to the practice of law in the State of New York by the Second Judicial Department on April 19, 1978. At all times relevant to this proceeding, respondent has maintained an office for the practice of law within the First Judicial Department.

The Departmental Disciplinary Committee seeks an order, pursuant to 22 NYCRR 603.4(e)(1)(i), immediately suspending respondent from the practice of law, until further order of the Court, based upon his failure to cooperate with the Committee in its investigation of professional misconduct.

In August 2009, a client filed a complaint with the Committee against respondent alleging that she had retained respondent in 2005 to file a medical malpractice wrongful death action on behalf of her mother's estate and that he neglected the case by failing to return her calls for approximately one year. After initially failing to answer the complaint, respondent submitted a response stating that the case was at the discovery stage and that he felt uncomfortable continuing to represent the client due to her complaint to the Committee. In her November 2009 reply, the client stated that respondent eventually called her upon receiving her complaint, and that she too had reservations regarding his continued representation due to his stated apprehensions.

On December 15, 2009, the Committee referred the matter to the Bronx County Bar Association for mediation. However, respondent failed to appear at the first scheduled mediation conference, claiming that he never received notice of it. At the second scheduled mediation conference date, the mediator telephoned him after he failed to arrive at the scheduled time, and respondent stated that the appointment had "slipped his mind" and that he had a "family emergency" and asked for it to be rescheduled again. The ...


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.