Dougherty, In re
| Decision Date | 06 January 1959 |
| Parties | In the Matter of William A. DOUGHERTY, an Attorney (admitted as William Aldrew Dougherty). Association of the Bar of the City of New York, petitioner. |
| Court | New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division |
Frank H. Gordon, New York City, of counsel (Lewis B. Reynolds, New York City, with him on the brief), for petitioner.
John T. Cahill, New York City, of counsel (James B. Henry, Jr., Howard W. Phillips and William J. Quinlan, New York City, with him on the brief), for respondent.
Before BOTEIN, P. J., and RABIN, McNALLY, STEVENS and BERGAN, JJ.
Respondent, who was admitted to the Bar of New York on motion in 1936, is charged with professional misconduct in making false and misleading statements under oath before the Securities and Exchange Commission. The facts are not in dispute. Respondent, who represented clients in the public utilities field, had given a $5,000 check to a public official of the State of Illinois. That official was thereafter removed from office and convicted of embezzling state funds. Examination of his affairs disclosed a private bank account in which respondent's check had been deposited. Interested in whether there had been any violation of the Public Utility Holding Company Act, 15 U.S.C.A. § 79 et seq., the Securities and Exchange Commission commenced an investigation. Respondent appeared before an examiner in New York, and in response to inquiry about the check, flatly denied under oath that he had given the check to the public official under investigation, and denied any knowledge as to how it had come into his possession. He gave an elaborate account of how he had drawn the check as a loan for a friend, whose identity he declined to disclose, and stated that he had been repaid. It is now conceded that respondent's tetimony was false and misleading in several important respects.
On being subsequently recalled by the Securities and Exchange Commission examiner, respondent refused to give any further testimony, and claimed privilege against possible self-incrimination. Immunity was thereupon conferred upon him, at which point respondent made a full disclosure. He attempted to justify some of his prior answers by some exercises in casuistry, contending that they were not completely untruthful, although concededly evasive and misleading.
At a subsequent hearing before the Securities and Exchange Commission to investigate respondent's fitness to practice before the Commission, respondent, although he admitted all the facts, insisted that he saw nothing wrong in making a loan to an influential public official to promote a friendly attitude in the event it might become expedient to enlist his cooperation on behalf of a client; and asserted that he was justified in his refusal to disclose, or as he put it, 'be forward' about matters be believed to be beyond the scope of proper inquiry by the Commission. He further indicated that he thought the Securities and Exchange Commission examiner guilty of excessive zeal in making a mountain out of a molehill by going into a matter of a 'measly little $5,000' compared with over a million dollars which had been embezzled from the Illinois State Treasury. Respondent was suspended from practice before the Securities and Exchange Commission on ...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Kahn, In re
... ... Dougherty, 7 A.D.2d 163, 165, 180 N.Y.S.2d 971, 973). Respondent's misconduct is deemed sufficiently grave to interdict restoration to the profession on any terms. (See Matter of Schner, 5 A.D.2d 599, 600, 173 N.Y.S.2d 649, 650.) She has been found guilty of a crime which strikes at the roots of the ... ...
-
Anonymous Attorneys v. Bar Ass'n of Erie County
... ... 216, 52 N.E. 1106; Matter of Dougherty, 7 A.D.2d 163, 180 N.Y.S.2d 971, affd., 7 N.Y.2d 869, 196 N.Y.S.2d 999, 164 N.E.2d 870, remittitur amd. 7 N.Y.2d 965, 198 N.Y.S.2d 615, 166 N.E.2d 192, Judiciary Law, § 90; Chilingirian, State Disbarment Proceedings and the Privilege Against Self-Incrimination, 18 Buffalo L.Rev. 489). The ... ...
-
Friedman, Matter of
...lack of candor, whether technically perjurious or not, breached the standards of professional ethics" (In the Matter of Dougherty, 7 A.D.2d 163, 165, 180 N.Y.S.2d 971; see also, In the Matter of Kunstler, 248 A.D. 393, 289 N.Y.S. 107). To the same effect, in Matter of Schildhaus, 23 A.D.2d ......
-
Nearing, In re
...the public that, as far as known, certain taints do not exist, because, if discovered, they would be eradicated (Matter of Dougherty, 7 A.D.2d 163, 165, 180 N.Y.S.2d 971, 973, aff'd 7 N.Y.2d 869, 196 N.Y.S.2d 999, 164 N.E.2d We come now to the application of these principles to the matter b......