Matter of Osmond

Annotate this Case
Matter of Osmond 2013 NY Slip Op 01599 Decided on March 14, 2013 Appellate Division, Third Department Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law ยง 431. This opinion is uncorrected and subject to revision before publication in the Official Reports.

Decided and Entered: March 14, 2013

[*1]In the Matter of JEFFREY OSMOND, an Attorney. COMMITTEE ON PROFESSIONAL STANDARDS, Petitioner; JEFFREY OSMOND, Respondent. (Attorney Registration No. 4133757)

Calendar Date: January 21, 2013
Before: Peters, P.J., Mercure, Rose and Lahtinen, JJ.


Peter M. Torncello, Committee on Professional
Standards, Albany (Elizabeth M. Devane of counsel), for petitioner.
Jeffrey Osmond, Sayre, Pennsylvania, respondent pro
se.

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER



Per Curiam.

Respondent was admitted to practice by this Court in 2003. He maintained an office for the practice of law in Pennsylvania, where he was admitted to practice in 1992.

By order dated October 28, 2010, the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania disbarred respondent on consent for several admitted acts of professional misconduct, including converting in excess of $160,000 from a trust for his personal use and engaging in conduct involving dishonesty, fraud, deceit or misrepresentation. Additionally, as the result of his actions related to the trust, respondent pleaded guilty to "theft by failure to make required disposition of funds," a third-degree felony in Pennsylvania.

Petitioner now moves for an order imposing discipline pursuant to this Court's rules (see 22 NYCRR 806.19). Respondent has filed responsive papers indicating that he does not contest the imposition of discipline.

Under all of the circumstances presented, we grant petitioner's motion and further [*2]conclude that the same discipline should be imposed by this Court as was imposed in Pennsylvania, i.e., disbarment.

Peters, P.J., Mercure, Rose and Lahtinen, JJ., concur.

ORDERED that petitioner's motion is granted; and it is further

ORDERED that respondent is disbarred and his name is stricken from the roll of attorneys and counselors-at-law of the State of New York, effective immediately; and it is further

ORDERED that respondent is commanded to desist and refrain from the practice of law in any form, either as principal or as agent, clerk or employee of another; and respondent is hereby forbidden to appear as an attorney or counselor-at-law before any court, judge, justice, board, commission or other public authority, or to give to another an opinion as to the law or its application, or any advice in relation thereto; and it is further

ORDERED that respondent shall comply with the provisions of this Court's rules regulating the conduct of disbarred attorneys (see 22 NYCRR 806.9).

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.