Per Curiam — On January 24, 2023, the Grievance Committee for the Second, Eleventh, and Thirteenth Judicial Districts served the respondent with a notice of petition and a verified petition, both dated January 18, 2023, and duly filed those papers with this Court together with an affidavit of service. The petition contains one charge which alleges that the respondent failed to cooperate with the Grievance Committee’s investigation of a complaint of professional misconduct, in violation of rule 8.4(d) and (h) 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 verified petition as directed. The Grievance Committee now moves to deem the charge against the respondent established and to impose such discipline upon him as this Court deems appropriate based upon his default in filing an answer to the verified petition. Although the motion papers were served upon the respondent on February 23, 2023, he has neither opposed the instant motion nor interposed any other response thereto. By separate motion, the Grievance Committee moves, inter alia, pursuant to 22 NYCRR 1240.9(a)(1) and (3) to immediately suspend the respondent from the practice of law, upon a finding that he is guilty of professional misconduct immediately threatening the public interest. Accordingly, the Grievance Committee’s motion to deem the charge in the verified petition dated January 18, 2023, established is granted, the charge in the verified petition is deemed established, and, effective immediately, the respondent is disbarred and his name is stricken from the roll of attorneys and counselors-at-law. The separate motion, inter alia, pursuant to 22 NYCRR 1240.9(a)(1) and (3) to immediately suspend the respondent from the practice of law is denied as academic. All concur. LASALLE, P.J., DILLON, DUFFY, BARROS and CHRISTOPHER, JJ., concur. ORDERED that the Grievance Committee’s motion to deem the charge in the verified petition dated January 18, 2023, established is granted, and the Grievance Committee’s separate motion, inter alia, pursuant to 22 NYCRR 1240.9(a)(1) and (3) to immediately suspend the respondent, David G. Katzman, admitted as David Gary Katzman, from the practice of law is denied as academic; and it is further, ORDERED that, pursuant to Judiciary Law §90, effective immediately, the respondent, David G. Katzman, admitted as David Gary Katzman, is disbarred, and his name is stricken from the roll of attorneys and counselors-at-law; and it is further, ORDERED that the respondent, David G. Katzman, admitted as David Gary Katzman, 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, David G. Katzman, admitted as David Gary Katzman, 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, David G. Katzman, admitted as David Gary Katzman, 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: Darrell M. Joseph Acting Clerk of the Court
