- Bookmark
- Share
- CaseIQ
Matter of Gonzalez
Matter of Gonzalez
2026 NY Slip Op 06116 October 21, 2026 Appellate Division, Second Department Per Curiam
Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law § 431. This decision is uncorrected and subject to revision before publication in the Official Reports. In the Matter of Carlos Gonzalez, a suspended attorney, respondent. (Attorney Registration No. 4341707) Supreme Court of the State of New York, Appellate Division, Second Judicial Department Decided on October 21, 2026
2024-07851
Hector D. Lasalle, P.J.
Mark C. Dillon
Colleen D. Duffy
Betsy Barros
Angela G. Iannacci, JJ.
Courtny Osterling, White Plains, NY (Thomas Graham Amon of counsel), for Grievance Committee for the Ninth Judicial District.
Carlos Gonzalez, Apopka, Florida, respondent pro se.
APPLICATION pursuant to 22 NYCRR 1240.10 by Carlos Gonzalez, who was admitted to the Bar at a term of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the Second Judicial Department on September 28, 2005, to resign as an attorney and counselor-at-law. By opinion and order of this Court dated April 14, 2021, the respondent was suspended from the practice of law for a period of six months, effective May 14, 2021 (see Matter of Gonzalez, 194 AD3d 152). In a separate proceeding, by opinion and order of this Court dated December 8, 2021, the respondent was suspended from the practice of law for a period of 18 months effective November 14, 2021, to run consecutively to the suspension imposed by this Court's prior opinion and order dated April 14, 2021 (see Matter of Gonzalez, 201 AD3d 122). Per Curiam. [*1]
OPINION & ORDER The respondent, Carlos Gonzalez, has submitted an affidavit sworn to on August 15, 2025, in support of his application to resign as an attorney and counselor-at-law (see 22 NYCRR 1240.10). The respondent acknowledges in his affidavit that he is currently the subject of a disciplinary proceeding commenced by the Grievance Committee for the Ninth Judicial District, pursuant to 22 NYCRR 1240.8 by the service and the filing of a notice of petition and a verified petition, both dated August 13, 2024, alleging 17 charges of professional misconduct with respect to the matters of five clients: Sekou Coulibaly, Jose Rebaza, Norberto Mussenden, Adonis Betances, and Ngawang Choeyang. The respondent is charged with failing to act with reasonable diligence and promptness in representing a client and neglecting a legal matter entrusted to him, in violation of rule 1.3(a) and (b) of the Rules of Professional Conduct (22 NYCRR 1200.0), respectively, in three of the client matters; failing to refund an unearned fee, in violation of rule 1.16(e) of the Rules of Professional Conduct in four of the client matters; failing to keep a client reasonably informed about the status of the matter, in violation of rule 1.4(a)(3) of the Rules of Professional Conduct in one of the client matters; failing to promptly comply with a client's reasonable request for information, in violation of rule 1.4(a)(4) of the Rules of Professional Conduct in two of the client matters; and engaging in conduct prejudicial to the administration of justice and conduct that adversely reflects on the respondent's fitness as a lawyer, in violation of rule 8.4(d) and (h) of the Rules of Professional Conduct, respectively, in all of the client matters collectively. The respondent also acknowledges in his affidavit that he is currently the subject of an investigation commenced by the Grievance Committee, based on a complaint of professional misconduct filed by another client, Gabriel Alexander. The respondent avers that he failed to timely apprise Alexander of his April 14, 2021 suspension and failed to return a $1,500 legal fee Alexander [*2]paid to the respondent, despite promising to do so. The respondent attests that he cannot successfully defend against the charges and allegations based upon the facts and circumstances of his professional misconduct as described herein.
The respondent also avers that his resignation is freely and voluntarily tendered, without coercion or duress by anyone, and with full awareness of the consequences, including that the Court's acceptance and approval shall result in the entry of an order of disbarment striking his name from the roll of attorneys and counselors-at-law.
1
As to the issue of restitution, the respondent consents to the entry of an order by the Court, pursuant to Judiciary Law § 90(6-a), directing that he make monetary restitution to Sekou Coulibaly in the amount of $750; to Jose Rebaza in the amount of $1,500; to Norberto Mussenden in the amount of $7,500; to Adonis Betances in the amount of $15,000; to Ngawang Choeyang in the amount of $6,500; and to Gabriel Alexander in the amount of $1,500. The respondent further acknowledges that his resignation is submitted subject to any future application that may be made by a Grievance Committee for an order, pursuant to Judiciary Law § 90(6-a), directing that he make restitution to or reimburse the Lawyers' Fund for Client Protection of the State of New York, and he consents to the Court's continuing jurisdiction to make such an order.
The respondent also acknowledges and agrees that pending the issuance of an order accepting his resignation, he will not undertake to represent any new clients or accept any retainers for future legal services to be rendered and that there will be no transactional activity in any fiduciary account to which he has access, other than for payment of funds held therein on behalf of clients or others entitled to receive them.
Lastly, the respondent acknowledges that in the event the Court accepts his resignation, the order resulting therefrom and the records and documents filed in relation to the aforementioned allegations, including his affidavit, shall be deemed public records pursuant to Judiciary Law § 90(10).
The respondent requests that, if his resignation is accepted, the order striking his name from the roll of attorneys and counselors-at-law and disbarring him be effective as of May 14, 2021, or in the alternative, as of November 14, 2022. The Grievance Committee recommends that the Court grant the respondent's application to resign and takes no position with respect to the respondent's request that the order striking his name from the roll of attorneys and counselors-at-law and disbarring him be effective as of May 14, 2021, or in the alternative, as of November 14, 2022. Inasmuch as the respondent's application to resign complies with the requirements of 22 NYCRR 1240.10, the respondent's application to resign is granted, and effective immediately, the respondent is disbarred, and his name is stricken from the roll of attorneys and counselors-at-law. The respondent's request that the order striking his name from the roll of attorneys and counselors-at-law and disbarring him be effective as of May 14, 2021, or in the alternative, as of November 14, 2022, is denied.
LASALLE, P.J., DILLON, DUFFY, BARROS, and IANNACCI, JJ., concur.
ORDERED that the application of the respondent, Carlos Gonzalez, a suspended attorney, to resign as an attorney and counselor-at-law is granted; and it is further,
ORDERED that pursuant to Judiciary Law § 90, effective immediately, the respondent, Carlos Gonzalez, a suspended attorney, is disbarred, and his name is stricken from the roll of attorneys and counselors-at-law; and it is further,
ORDERED that the respondent, Carlos Gonzalez, 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 § 90, effective immediately, the respondent, Carlos Gonzalez, shall continue to desist and refrain from (1) practicing law in any form, either as principal or as 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 any advice in relation thereto, and (4) holding himself out in any way as an attorney and counselor-at-law; and it is further,
ORDERED that pursuant to Judiciary Law § 90(6-a)(a), the respondent, Carlos Gonzalez, shall reimburse the Lawyers' Fund for Client Protection of the State of New York for any [*3]awards made to Sekou Coulibaly, Jose Rebaza, Norberto Mussenden, Adonis Betances, Ngawang Choeyang, or Gabriel Alexander; and it is further,
ORDERED that in the event that no awards have been made by the Lawyers' Fund for Client Protection of the State of New York to Sekou Coulibaly, Jose Rebaza, Norberto Mussenden, Adonis Betances, Ngawang Choeyang, or Gabriel Alexander, the respondent, Carlos Gonzalez, (1) shall make monetary restitution to Sekou Coulibaly in the amount of $750; (2) shall make monetary restitution to Jose Rebaza in the amount of $1,500; (3) shall make monetary restitution to Norberto Mussenden in the amount of $7,500; (4) shall make monetary restitution to Adonis Betances in the amount of $15,000; (5) shall make monetary restitution to Ngawang Choeyang in the amount of $6,500; and (6) shall make monetary restitution to Gabriel Alexander in the amount of $1,500, pursuant to Judiciary Law § 90(6-a); and it is further,
ORDERED that in the event that partial awards have been made by the Lawyers' Fund for Client Protection of the State of New York to Sekou Coulibaly, Jose Rebaza, Norberto Mussenden, Adonis Betances, Ngawang Choeyang, or Gabriel Alexander, the respondent, Carlos Gonzalez, shall make partial restitution to those individuals to the extent that they have not been fully reimbursed, pursuant to Judiciary Law § 90(6-a); and it is further,
ORDERED that pursuant to Judiciary Law § 90(6-a)(d), this opinion and order may be entered as a civil judgment, and such judgment shall be enforceable as a money judgment in any court of competent jurisdiction by the party to whom payments are due hereunder in the amount set forth herein, minus any amount reimbursed by the Lawyers' Fund for Client Protection of the State of New York or by the Lawyers' Fund for Client Protection of the State of New York where it has been subrogated to the rights of such party; and it is further,
ORDERED that if the respondent, Carlos Gonzalez, has been issued a secure pass by the Office of Court Administration, it shall be returned forthwith to the issuing agency, and he shall certify to the same in his affidavit of compliance
2
pursuant to 22 NYCRR 1240.15(f).
ENTER:
Darrell M. Joseph Clerk of the Court
3
Alert