PER CURIAM — On December 28, 2020, the Grievance Committee for the Ninth Judicial District personally served the respondent with a notice of petition and a verified petition, dated December 15, 2020, and December 3, 2020, respectively, and duly filed those papers with this Court together with the respondent’s acknowledgment of service. The verified petition contains two charges of professional misconduct, alleging that the respondent engaged in conduct prejudicial to the administration of justice (charge one), failed to render appropriate accounts to a client or third person (charge two), and engaged in other conduct that adversely reflects on his fitness as a lawyer (charges one and two) in violation of rules 8.4(d) and (h) and 1.15(c)(3) of the Rules of Professional Conduct (22 NYCRR 1200.0). The notice of petition directed the respondent to serve and file his answer to the verified petition within 20 days after service upon him of the notice of petition and the verified petition. To date, the respondent has neither served nor filed an answer to the petition as directed, nor requested additional time in which to do so. The Grievance Committee now moves to deem the charges against the respondent established based upon his default and to impose such discipline upon him as this Court deems appropriate. The motion papers were served upon the respondent on December 6, 2021, by overnight delivery. To date, the respondent has neither opposed the instant motion nor interposed any response thereto. Accordingly, the Grievance Committee’s motion to deem the charges against the respondent established based upon his default is granted, the charges in the verified petition dated December 3, 2020, are deemed established, and, effective immediately, the respondent is disbarred and his name is stricken from the roll of attorneys and counselors-at-law. All concur. LASALLE, P.J., DILLON, DUFFY, BARROS and IANNACCI, JJ., concur. ORDERED that the Grievance Committee’s motion to deem the charges in the verified petition dated December 3, 2020, established upon the default of the respondent, Samuel Rubin, is granted; and it is further, ORDERED that pursuant to Judiciary Law §90, effective immediately, the respondent, Samuel Rubin, is disbarred, and his name is stricken from the roll of attorneys and counselors-at-law; and it is further, ORDERED that the respondent, Samuel Rubin, shall comply with the rules governing the conduct of disbarred or suspended attorneys (see 22 NYCRR 1240.15); and it is further, ORDERED that pursuant to Judiciary Law §90, the respondent, Samuel Rubin, is commanded to desist and refrain from (1) practicing law in any form, either as principal or as agent, clerk, or employee of another, (2) appearing as an attorney or counselor-at-law before any court, Judge, Justice, board, commission, or other public authority, (3) giving to another an opinion as to the law or its application or any advice in relation thereto, and (4) holding himself out in any way as an attorney and counselor-at-law; and it is further, ORDERED that if the respondent, Samuel Rubin, has been issued a secure pass by the Office of Court Administration, it shall be returned forthwith to the issuing agency, and the respondent shall certify to the same in his affidavit of compliance pursuant to 22 NYCRR 1240.15(f). ENTER: Maria T. Fasulo Clerk of the Court
