In the Matter of Mark F. Dickson, an attorney and counselor-at-law. Grievance Committee for the Tenth Judicial District, petitioner; Mark F. Dickson, respondent. Attorney Registration No. 1388917
by the Grievance Committee for the Tenth Judicial District to
strike the respondent's name from the roll of attorneys
and counselors-at-law, pursuant to Judiciary Law §
90(4), upon his conviction of a felony. The respondent was
admitted to the Bar at a term of the Appellate Division of
the Supreme Court in the Second Judicial Department on May 7,
Lorenzo, Hauppauge, NY (Stacey J. Sharpeletti of counsel),
RANDALL T. ENG, P.J., WILLIAM F. MASTRO, REINALDO E. RIVERA,
MARK C. DILLON, RUTH C. BALKIN, JJ.
OPINION & ORDER
September 1, 2016, the respondent entered a plea of no
contest before the Honorable Lisa Porter, in the 17th
Judicial Circuit Court in and for Broward County, Florida, to
four counts of grand theft in the first degree, in violation
of Florida Statutes Annotated § 812.014(1)(a), (b), and
(2)(a)(1); six counts of grand theft in the second degree, in
violation of Florida Statutes Annotated § 812.014(1)(a),
(b), and (2)(b)(1); and three counts of grand theft in the
third degree, in violation of Florida Statutes Annotated
§ 812.014(1)(a), (b), and (2)(c)(3). He was sentenced to
a term of 7 years' imprisonment, followed by 10
years' probation. In addition, he was directed to make
underlying facts involved a scheme whereby the respondent
misled his clients (insurance companies seeking recovery of
damages from at-fault parties) into thinking their claims
could not be resolved and that they should close their files.
Once his clients walked away, the respondent would secretly
negotiate settlements and keep the money for his personal
stated by the Court of Appeals in Matter of
Margiotta (60 N.Y.2d 147, 150):
"The Judiciary Law provides for automatic disbarment
when an attorney is convicted of a felony. Under this
section, an offense committed in any other State, district or
territory of the United States where it is classified as a
felony is determined to be a felony when it would constitute
a felony in this state.' (Judiciary Law, § 90, subd
4, par e.) For purposes of this determination, the felony in
the other jurisdiction need not be a mirror image of the New
York felony, precisely corresponding in every detail, but it
must have essential similarity."
Statutes Annotated § 812.014 (1)(a) provides that:
"[a] person commits theft if he or she knowingly obtains
or uses, or endeavors to obtain or to use, the property of
another with intent to, either temporarily or permanently...
[d]eprive the other person of a right to the property or a
benefit from the property." A person commits grand theft
in the second degree if "the property stolen is valued
at $20, 000 or more, but less than $100, 000" (Fla Stat
Ann § 812.014[b]).
Florida offense of grand theft in the second degree is
"essentially similar" to the New York offense of
grand larceny in the third degree, in violation of Penal Law
§ 155.35(1), a class D felony, which provides that
"[a] person is guilty of grand larceny in the third
degree when he or she steals property and... when the value
of the property exceeds three thousand dollars" (see
Matter of Hodkin, 142 A.D.3d 193; see also Matter of
Barisic, 110 A.D.3d 84).
Grievance Committee for the Tenth Judicial District now moves
to strike the respondent's name from the roll of
attorneys and counselors-at-law based on the respondent's
conviction of a felony. Although personally served with a
copy of the motion on January 26, 2017, the respondent has
neither submitted a response nor requested additional time in
which to do so.
virtue of his conviction of a felony, the respondent was
automatically disbarred and ceased to be an attorney pursuant
to Judiciary Law § 90(4)(a).
the Grievance Committee's motion to strike the
respondent's name from the roll of attorneys and
counselors-at-law, pursuant to Judiciary Law § 90(4)(b),
is granted to reflect the respondent's automatic
disbarment on September 1, 2016.
that New York State Office of Court Administration records
reflect that the respondent is delinquent in the payment of
his attorney re-registration fees for three ...