Your front-page article regarding a Western District magistrate judge’s recommendation in Bounkhoun v. Barnes, 2017 WL 1331359 (“Criminal Conviction Needed for Attorney Misconduct Finding,” April 24) quoted a law professor to the effect that the magistrate “may be right.” In fact, the magistrate’s decision is directly contrary to New York law, which has held for at least 100 years that a judgment in a civil action under Judiciary Law §487 (and its predecessors) does not require either a criminal conviction or proof beyond a reasonable doubt.
That rule was reaffirmed as recently as 2005 in Papa v. 24 Caryl Ave. Realty, 23 A.D.3d 361, 362 (Second Dep’t 2005), relying on Snow v. Shreffler, 148 App.Div. 422 (Fourth Dep’t 1911) (“Contrary to [defendant's] contentions, the [§487] judgment against him in this civil action does not constitute a criminal conviction requiring proof beyond a reasonable doubt at trial.”)
This content has been archived.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
LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law are third party online distributors of the broad collection of current and archived versions of ALM's legal news publications. LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law customers are able to access and use ALM's content, including content from the National Law Journal, The American Lawyer, Legaltech News, The New York Law Journal, and Corporate Counsel, as well as other sources of legal information.
For questions call 1-877-256-2472 or contact us at [email protected]
