In the Matter of Sam Z. Shore, a suspended attorney. Grievance Committee for the Tenth Judicial District, petitioner; Sam Z. Shore, respondent. Attorney Registration No. 2493906
The
respondent was admitted to the Bar at a term of the Appellate
Division of the Supreme Court in the First Judicial
Department on June 22, 1992. By decision and order of this
Court dated April 20, 2017, inter alia, the respondent was
immediately suspended pursuant to Judiciary Law §
90(4)(f) based on his conviction of a serious crime, and the
respondent was directed to show cause at a hearing pursuant
to 22 NYCRR 1240.12(c)(2) before the Honorable John Kase, as
Special Referee, why a final order of suspension, censure, or
disbarment should not be made based on his conviction of a
serious crime.
Catherine A. Sheridan, Hauppauge, NY (Ian P. Barry of
counsel), for petitioner.
Long
Tuminello, LLP, Bay Shore, NY (Michele Aulivola of counsel),
for respondent.
ALAN
D. SCHEINKMAN, P.J., WILLIAM F. MASTRO, RUTH C. BALKIN, JOHN
M. LEVENTHAL, CHERYL E. CHAMBERS, JJ.
OPINION & ORDER
PER
CURIAM.
On
April 29, 2014, as amended on March 11, 2016, the respondent
pleaded guilty, in the Supreme Court, Suffolk County, before
the Honorable Martin I. Efman, to 11 counts of criminal
facilitation in the fourth degree, in violation of Penal Law
§ 115.00, a class A misdemeanor, and 6 counts of petit
larceny, in violation of Penal Law § 155.25, a class A
misdemeanor. On March 11, 2016, he was sentenced to a
probationary period of three years on each count, to run
concurrently, and directed to perform 420 hours of community
service and pay a $50 DNA fee. In addition, the respondent
agreed to make restitution to Meridian Mortgage in the sum of
approximately $200, 000, and to pay a forfeiture to the
Suffolk County District Attorney in the sum of $4, 000.
As
revealed in the plea minutes, from in and about September
2007 to April 2008, the respondent "engage[d] in
conduct, believing it to be probable, that [he was] rendering
aid to... Boris Matsokhin and others, to aid such person to
commit a felony, including grand larceny in the second degree
and residential mortgage fraud." More specifically, the
respondent provided false documentation, including HUD-1
forms, to facilitate numerous fraudulent mortgage
transactions. In exchange for his cooperation with the
Suffolk County District Attorney the respondent was permitted
to plead guilty to misdemeanor offenses.
In a
report dated September 6, 2017, the Special Referee noted,
with regard to mitigation: "Beyond any doubt the
respondent is a well-respected religiously participating
person who in his community... does charitable work and pro
bono service. He is a family man." The Special Referee
concluded: "Mr. Shore is aware of his mistake and
accepted responsibility for it. He has cooperated with the
government and leniency... is appropriate."
The
Grievance Committee for the Tenth Judicial District moves to
confirm the report of the Special Referee. In response to the
motion, the respondent asks for leniency, pointing to the
mitigating evidence presented, which includes his good
character and high moral standards, his reputation for
honesty and integrity, his prodigious commitment to charity
and helping others, his devotion to family, his limited role
as the closing attorney in the subject real estate
transactions, and his cooperation with the Suffolk County
District Attorney that resulted in the successful
investigation and prosecution of other mortgage fraud crimes.
The respondent specifically requests that the time served
under his interim suspension be deemed sufficient discipline
for his offenses.
Notwithstanding
the aforementioned mitigation, including the respondent's
remorse and the absence of a prior disciplinary history, the
respondent's transgressions, while limited as far as his
role in the mortgage fraud scheme, were repeated and
significant. He was initially charged with 17 felony counts,
but under a plea agreement with law enforcement authorities,
the respondent was permitted to plead to only misdemeanor
offenses in exchange for his cooperation in assisting the
authorities with other arrests and prosecutions. The scope
and magnitude of the respondent's wrongdoing is reflected
in his plea of guilty to 11 counts of criminal facilitation
in the fourth degree and 6 counts of petit larceny. The sheer
number of offenses distinguishes this matter from Matter
of Lovegrove (136 A.D.3d 10), relied on by the
respondent. The respondent, an experienced attorney who was
meticulous in his handling of closings, should have known
that the subject real estate transactions were less than bona
fide.
Under
the totality of the circumstances, we conclude that the
respondent's criminal conduct warrants a suspension from
the practice of law for two years, with no credit for the
time elapsed under the interim suspension order.
SCHEINKMAN, P.J., MASTRO, BALKIN, LEVENTHAL and CHAMBERS,
JJ., concur.
ORDERED
that the petitioner's motion to confirm the Special
Referee's report is granted; and it is further, ORDERED
that the respondent, Sam Z. Shore, is suspended from the
practice of law for a period of two years, effective
immediately, and continuing until further order of this
Court. The respondent shall not apply for reinstatement
earlier than December 27, 2019. In such application
(see 22 NYCRR 691.11, 1240.16), the respondent shall
furnish satisfactory proof that during said period he: (1)
refrained from practicing or attempting to practice law, (2)
fully complied with this order and with the terms and
provisions of the rules governing the conduct of disbarred or
suspended attorneys (see 22 NYCRR 1240.15), (3)
complied with the applicable continuing legal education
requirements of 22 NYCRR 691.11, and (4) otherwise properly
conducted himself; and it is further, ORDERED that the
respondent, Sam Z. Shore, shall continue to comply with the
rules governing the conduct of disbarred or suspended
attorneys (see 22 NYCRR 1240.15); and it is further,
ORDERED that pursuant to Judiciary Law ยง 90, during the
period of suspension and until the further order of this
Court, the respondent, Sam Z. Shore, shall continue to desist
and refrain from (1) practicing law in any form, either as
principal or agent, clerk, or employee of another, (2)
appearing as an attorney or counselor-at-law before any
court, Judge, Justice, board, commission, or other public
authority, (3) giving to another an opinion as to the law or
its application or ...