Matter of Pitkowsky

2025 NY Slip Op 01373 · Appellate Division, Second Judicial Department · March 12, 2025 · No. 2024-11187

Summary

This Appellate Division, Second Department order resolves a disciplinary proceeding initiated by the Grievance Committee for the Tenth Judicial District against attorney Herbert G. Pitkowsky. The committee moved to deem charges of professional misconduct established due to the respondent's failure to file an answer or oppose the motion. The court granted the motion, found the charges established by default, and immediately disbarred Pitkowsky, striking his name from the roll of attorneys.

Court
Appellate Division, Second Judicial Department
Writing for the Court
Per Curiam; HECTOR D. LASALLE, P.J.; MARK C. DILLON; COLLEEN D. DUFFY; BETSY BARROS; FRANCESCA E. CONNOLLY, JJ.
Jurisdiction
New York
Decision date
March 12, 2025
Docket number
2024-11187
Procedural posture
Grievance Committee moved to deem the charges established by default after respondent failed to answer; the Appellate Division granted the motion and ordered respondent disbarred.
Precedential value
Published
Parties
Grievance Committee for the Tenth Judicial District v. Herbert G. Pitkowsky
Disposition
other

Topics

administrative lawappellate procedurestandard of review

Practice areas

administrative lawprofessional responsibility

Questions Presented

  1. Whether the Grievance Committee's motion to deem the charges established by default should be granted and whether disbarment is the appropriate discipline.

Holdings

  1. The motion is granted; the charges are deemed established by default and the respondent is disbarred pursuant to Judiciary Law § 90.

Key quotations

the respondent, Herbert G. Pitkowsky, is disbarred, and his name is stricken from the roll of attorneys and counselors-at-law (at 1)

Factual background

Herbert G. Pitkowsky, an attorney admitted to the Bar in 1985, was charged with conduct prejudicial to the administration of justice and with failing to cooperate with a grievance investigation, violations of Rule 8.4(d) and (h). He failed to serve or file an answer to the petition within the required time.

Procedural history

The Grievance Committee filed a petition alleging violations of Rules of Professional Conduct. The respondent did not file an answer within the 20‑day period and did not request an extension. The Committee moved for default; the court granted the motion and imposed disbarment.

Court Document

Open PDF
Loading document…