Matter of Pollack v Kiernan
Decided on April 11, 2013
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.
Andrias, J.P., Moskowitz, Freedman, Manzanet-Daniels, Feinman, JJ.
Order, Supreme Court, Kings County (Herbert Kramer, J.), entered on or about November 17, 2011, which granted the petition brought pursuant to CPLR article 78 to the extent of directing the Appellate Division, Second Department, to forward certain documents in petitioner's disciplinary file to Supreme Court for in camera review, unanimously reversed, on the law, without costs, and the petition denied, and the proceeding dismissed.
Judiciary Law § 90(10) provides that the Appellate Division has the jurisdiction to permit documents pertaining to an attorney disciplinary proceeding to be divulged. Therefore, Supreme Court lacked the authority to order disclosure of such documents.
THIS CONSTITUTES THE DECISION AND ORDER OF THE SUPREME COURT, APPELLATE DIVISION, FIRST DEPARTMENT.
© 1992-2013 VersusLaw ...