Veteran Manhattan Lawyer Suspended for Alleged Misappropriations
Lawyer Dennis A. Schuman has been suspended based on evidence that between 2012 and 2018 he allegedly misappropriated case settlement funds, and ignored or found ways around third-party liens on parts of the funds, in three different instances, according to an Appellate Division, First Department decision.
March 06, 2020 at 05:35 PM
4 minute read
A veteran Manhattan lawyer has been suspended from practicing law immediately pending further court order, and he may face more punishment, after a state appeals court found Thursday that the attorney repeatedly misappropriated and converted client and third-party funds held in escrow, often using the money for himself.
Dennis A. Schuman, whose office phone line describes him as a personal injury and general practice attorney, and who has been practicing law for more than 40 years in New York, has been suspended based on evidence that between 2012 and 2018 he misappropriated case settlement funds, and ignored or found ways around third-party liens on parts of the funds, in three different instances, according to an Appellate Division, First Department decision suspending him.
Schuman, who is representing himself pro se before the First Department, could not be reached for comment Friday.
In one instance, wrote a unanimous First Department panel, which cited evidence gathered by an investigating First Department attorney grievance committee, Schuman in late 2012 deposited $75,000 in settlement funds into his escrow account and then issued a check to his client for only $1,000.
At the same time, Global Financial Credit LLC, a litigation financing company, which had loaned the client in the case $6,000, maintained a lien on the settlement recovery, and, pursuant to an agreement, no money was to be disbursed by Schuman to his client until that lien was satisfied.
Then, between Dec. 26, 2012, and Jan. 31, 2013, Schuman made five cash withdrawals for a total of $31,750 from his escrow account while placing the cash into his operating account, the unanimous panel wrote.
And in February 2013, Schuman sent an escrow check for $20,000 to his client's landlord, the panel wrote.
Later, in March 2013, Schuman issued three escrow checks payable to himself totaling $22,000, even though at this point he still hadn't paid Global, which would end up having a claim to $18,000, the panel wrote.
During a 2019 deposition of Schuman conducted by the First Department disciplinary committee, he admitted to using his client's settlement funds for personal use, and the committee, the panel wrote, contends there's evidence that Schuman misappropriated about $29,000 to pay for personal and business expenses, even as he should have paid $18,000 to Global and $11,000 to his client.
The panel added that in response to those committee allegations, Schuman claims that he has since satisfied Global's lien and doesn't owe his any client money. But the panel noted that Schuman, who was admitted to the state bar in 1976, hasn't put forward any documents showing those payments have actually been made.
In another instance, Schuman settled a client's case for $45,000 in August 2016, wrote panel Justices Rolando Acosta, David Friedman, Dianne Renwick, Cynthia Kern and Jeffrey Oing, and they noted that the client had gotten a $4,150 cash advance loan from Global Financial in 2011.
The court in the underlying case ordered that from the $45,000 settlement, Schuman would be paid $10,500 in legal fees and Global would be paid $9,000 from the client's $34,500 share of the settlement. But Schuman later disbursed $25,500 to his client and $10,500 to himself, the panel wrote.
And then on December 20, 2017, he issued an escrow check for $9,000 payable to himself, which had on it the notation – "to pay [client] loan to Global Financial," and the $9,000 to Global was not paid, wrote the panel.
"Notably, at [a] February 7, 2019 deposition, respondent [Schuman] admitted that he used $9,000, intended for Global, to pay for personal and business expenses," the panel further wrote. The panel added, "In response to the Committee's allegation that respondent [Schuman] failed to pay Global in accordance with the court's order, respondent alleged that Global refused to accept money from him and sought a greater amount, which, in his view meant that the $9,000 no longer belonged to Global. Nevertheless, on February 23, 2018, respondent paid Global $9,000."
Near the end of its detailed opinion, the panel wrote, "We find that the committee has met its burden and respondent should be immediately suspended until further order of this court." The justices added, "The record sufficiently establishes that respondent [Schuman] repeatedly misappropriated and/or converted client and third-party funds and used the funds without permission for his own personal purposes."
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllLong Island Midsize Firm and Managing Partner Sued for Sexual Harassment, Discrimination
6 minute read$17B Episcopal Church Pension Fund Hires New Legal Chief as Staff Changes Continue
Trending Stories
- 1Infant Formula Judge Sanctions Kirkland's Jim Hurst: 'Overtly Crossed the Lines'
- 2Preparing Your Law Firm for 2025: Smart Ways to Embrace AI & Other Technologies
- 3Abbott, Mead Johnson Win Defense Verdict Over Preemie Infant Formula
- 4Greenberg Traurig Initiates String of Suits Following JPMorgan Chase's 'Infinite Money Glitch'
- 5It's Time Law Firms Were Upfront About Who Their Salaried Partners Are
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250