Matter of Attorneys in Violation of Judiciary Law § 468-a. (Plisner)

Matter of Attorneys in Violation of Judiciary Law  468-a. (Plisner) 2019 NY Slip Op 08475 Decided on November 21, 2019 Appellate Division, Third Department Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law § 431. This opinion is uncorrected and subject to revision before publication in the Official Reports.

Decided and Entered: November 21, 2019
PM-206-19

[*1]In the Matter of Attorneys in Violation of Judiciary Law § 468-a. Amanda Gail Plisner, Respondent. (Attorney Registration No. 4923850.)

Calendar Date: November 4, 2019
Before: Garry, P.J., Lynch, Clark and Pritzker, JJ., concur.

Monica A. Duffy, Attorney Grievance Committee for the Third Judicial Department, Albany, for Attorney Grievance Committee for the Third Judicial Department.

Amanda Gail Plisner, Los Angeles, California, respondent pro se.

Motion by respondent for an order reinstating her to the practice of law following her suspension by May 2019 order of this Court (Matter of Attorneys in Violation of Judiciary Law § 468-a, 172 AD3d 1706, 1747 [2019]; see Rules for Attorney Disciplinary Matters [22 NYCRR] § 1240.16; Rules of App Div, 3d Dept [22 NYCRR] § 806.16).

Upon reading respondent's notice of motion and affidavit with exhibits sworn to September 27, 2019, and upon reading the October 31, 2019 responsive correspondence from the Attorney Grievance Committee for the Third Judicial Department, and having determined, by clear and convincing evidence, that (1) respondent has complied with the order of suspension and the Rules of this Court, (2) respondent has the requisite character and fitness to practice law, and (3) it would be in the public interest to reinstate respondent to the practice of law (see Matter of Attorneys in Violation of Judiciary Law § 468-a [Shoor], 175 AD3d 1771, 1771-1772 [2019]; Matter of Attorneys in Violation of Judiciary Law § 468-a [Serbinowski], 164 AD3d 1049, 1051 [2018]), it is

ORDERED that respondent's motion for reinstatement is granted; and it is further

ORDERED that respondent is reinstated as an attorney and counselor-at-law, effectively immediately.

Garry, P.J., Lynch, Clark and Pritzker, JJ., concur.