All
All
Parallel
Title
Appellant
Respondent
Lawyer
Parallel Search is an AI-driven legal research functionality that uses natural language understanding to find conceptually relevant case law, even without exact keyword matches.
Hi, I'm AMICUS. Your GPT powered virtual legal assistant.
Let's chat.
Log in
Sign Up
Select Country
India
UK
&
Ireland
AMICUS AI
CaseIQ
Keyword Research
Parallel Search
Browse
Commentaries
Columns
My Project
New chat
Federal
U.S. Supreme Court
Federal Circuit
1st Circuit
2d Circuit
3d Circuit
4th Circuit
5th Circuit
6th Circuit
7th Circuit
8th Circuit
9th Circuit
10th Circuit
11th Circuit
Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit
Board of Immigration Appeals
Special Courts
Bankruptcy
State
Alabama
Alaska
Arkansas
Arizona
California
Colorado
Connecticut
Delaware
District Of Columbia
Florida
Georgia
Guam
Hawaii
Iowa
Idaho
Illinois
Indiana
Kansas
Kentucky
Louisiana
Massachusetts
Maryland
Maine
Michigan
Minnesota
Missouri
Mississippi
Montana
Nebraska
North Carolina
North Dakota
New Hampshire
New Jersey
Northern Mariana Islands
New Mexico
Nevada
New York
Ohio
Oklahoma
Oregon
Pennsylvania
Puerto Rico
Rhode Island
South Carolina
South Dakota
Tennessee
Texas
Utah
Virginia
Vermont
Washington
Wisconsin
West Virginia
Wyoming
N.Y. Comp. Codes R. & Regs. tit. 22 § 1240.13 : JUDICIARY — Courts — Supreme Court — All Departments — Rules for Attorney Disciplinary Matters — Discipline for Misconduct in a Foreign Jurisdiction
Text
(a)
Upon application by a Committee containing proof that a person or firm covered by these Rules has been disciplined by a foreign jurisdiction, the Court shall direct that person or firm to demonstrate, on terms it deems just, why discipline should not be imposed in New York for the underlying misconduct.
(b)
The respondent may file an affidavit stating defenses to the imposition of discipline and raising any mitigating factors. Any or all of the following defenses may be raised:
(1)
that the procedure in the foreign jurisdiction was so lacking in notice or opportunity to be heard as to constitute a deprivation of due process; or
(2)
that there was such an infirmity of proof establishing the misconduct as to give rise to the clear conviction that the Court could not, consistent with its duties, accept as final the finding in the foreign jurisdiction as to the respondent's misconduct; or
(3)
that the misconduct for which the respondent was disciplined in the foreign jurisdiction does not constitute misconduct in New York.
(c)
After the respondent has had an opportunity to be heard, and upon review of the order entered by the foreign jurisdiction, and the record of the proceeding in that jurisdiction, if such record or part thereof is submitted by a party and deemed relevant by the Court, the Court may discipline the respondent for the misconduct committed in the foreign jurisdiction unless it finds that the procedure in the foreign jurisdiction deprived the respondent of due process of law, that there was insufficient proof that the respondent committed the misconduct, or that the imposition of discipline would be unjust.
(d)
Any person or firm to whom these Rules shall apply who has been disciplined in a foreign jurisdiction shall, within 30 days after such discipline is imposed, advise the appropriate Court (as described in section 1240.7(a)(2) of these Rules) and Committee of such discipline. Such notification shall be in writing and shall be accompanied by any judgment, order or certificate memorializing the discipline imposed. The person or firm shall thereafter provide the Committee with any further documentation, transcripts or other materials the Committee shall deem necessary to further its investigation.
N.Y. Comp. Codes R. & Regs. Tit. 22 § 1240.13
Adopted New York State Register October 12, 2016/Volume XXXVIII, Issue 41, eff.10/1/2016
×