Attorney Grievance Comm. for the First Judicial Dep't v. Pomerantz (In re Pomerantz), M–5692

• Decision Date: 11 January 2018
• Docket Number: M–5692
• Citation: 158 A.D.3d 26,68 N.Y.S.3d 460
• Parties: In the MATTER OF Mark S. POMERANTZ, (Admitted as Mark Steven Pomerantz), an Attorney and Counselor-at-Law: Attorney Grievance Committee for the First Judicial Department, Petitioner, v. Mark S. Pomerantz, (OCA Atty. Reg. No. 2035475), Respondent.
• Court: New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division

158 A.D.3d 26

68 N.Y.S.3d 460

In the MATTER OF Mark S. POMERANTZ, (Admitted as Mark Steven Pomerantz), an Attorney and Counselor-at-Law:Attorney Grievance Committee for the First Judicial Department, Petitioner,

v.Mark S. Pomerantz, (OCA Atty. Reg. No. 2035475), Respondent.

M–5692

Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department, New York.

[January 11, 2018]

Jorge Dopico, Chief Attorney, Attorney Grievance Committee, New York, (Raymond Vallejo, of counsel), for petitioner.

Respondent pro se.

Peter Tom, Justice, Presiding, Dianne T. Renwick, Richard T. Andrias, Judith J. Gische, Barbara R. Kapnick, Justices.

PER CURIAM

Respondent Mark S. Pomerantz was admitted to the practice of law in the State of New York by the Second Judicial Department on February 26, 1986, under the name Mark Steven Pomerantz. At all times relevant herein, he maintained an office for the practice of law within the First Judicial Department.

By order entered September 21, 2010, respondent was suspended from the practice of law for three months based on his plea of guilty to attempted criminal possession of a forged instrument ( 2010 N.Y. Slip Op. 82856[U] [1st Dept. 2010] ). By order entered March 24, 2011, he was reinstated (2011 N.Y. Slip Op. 67836[U] [1st Dept. 2011] ).

Respondent last registered with the Office of Court Administration (OCA) on or about June 4, 2014, listing a law firm as his business address. By letter dated July 24, 2017, the firm advised the Committee that respondent had stopped working there in February 2015. Respondent has failed to register or pay dues for the 2016/17 biennial period.

The Attorney Grievance Committee received a complaint from respondent's former wife alleging that he failed to comply with numerous financial obligations contained in an order issued on October 21, 2016, after hearing, by a Court Attorney Referee in Supreme Court, Nassau County, in their divorce proceedings. Prior to the hearing, by order dated May 21, 2015, respondent had been found in willful contempt based on his failure to pay $5,000 in interim counsel fees and committed to a correctional center for 60 days with a purge amount of $5,000, which he subsequently paid. By order dated May 20, 2016, respondent was found in willful contempt for a second time based on his alleged failure to pay child support and maintenance arrears, as required by a so-ordered stipulation dated December 4, 2015, and in failing to pay college tuition for their minor child.

Despite being served with the complaint, multiple demands that he answer the complaint, and a judicial subpoena duces tecum demanding his appearance, respondent has not appeared or contacted the Committee. Respondent has been notified repeatedly of his default and asked to contact the Committee, but has failed to do so, even though he has been advised that his failure to cooperate could expose him to an interim suspension.

The Committee now moves for an order, pursuant to the Rules for Attorney Disciplinary Matters ( 22 NYCRR) § 1240.9(a)(3) and (5), and Judiciary Law § 468–a(2), immediately suspending respondent from the practice of law until further order of this Court based upon his failure to comply with a lawful demand of the Court or the Committee, uncontroverted evidence of...