Attorney Grievance Comm. for the Third Judicial Dep't v. McArdle (In re Attorneys in Violation of Judiciary Law § 468-A)

178 N.Y.S.3d 468 (Mem)

In the MATTER OF ATTORNEYS IN VIOLATION OF JUDICIARY LAW § 468-A.

Attorney Grievance Committee for the Third Judicial Department, Petitioner;

v.Patricia McArdle, Respondent.

(Attorney Registration No. 2957280)

PM–225–22

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

Calendar Date: November 14, 2022

Decided and Entered: December 15, 2022

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

Patricia McArdle, Dallas, Texas, respondent pro se.

Before: Lynch, J.P., Clark, Aarons, Pritzker and Reynolds Fitzgerald, JJ.

DECISION AND ORDER ON MOTION

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 A.D.3d 1706, 1740, 104 N.Y.S.3d 211 [3d Dept. 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 affidavit with exhibits sworn to September 28, 2022 and supplemental affidavit with exhibits sworn to October 27, 2022, and the November 10, 2022 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,¹ (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 [Castle], 169 A.D.3d 1151, 1152–1153, 93 N.Y.S.3d 734 [3d Dept. 2019] ), and having concluded that respondent has complied with the requirements of Rules of the Appellate Division, Third Department (22 NYCRR) § 806.16(c)(5), it is

Lynch, J.P., Clark, Aarons, Pritzker and Reynolds Fitzgerald, JJ., concur.

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, effective immediately, subject to the conditions set forth in this decision (see n, supra ).

1 We do note that, in curing her longstanding registration delinquency in August 2021, respondent improperly asserted her "retired" status, notwithstanding the fact that she has continuously engaged in the practice of law in Texas (see Rules of Chief Admin of Cts [22 NYCRR] § 118.1 [g]). Accordingly, we direct respondent to file amended...